[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 159 (2013), Part 11]
[House]
[Pages 15405-15409]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                    THE ISSUE THAT WILL NOT GO AWAY

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from 
American Samoa (Mr. Faleomavaega) for 5 minutes.
  Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Speaker, I do not want to detract our attention 
from the current national debate on the government shutdown and the 
debt ceiling issue, but I do want to share with my colleagues an issue 
that will not go away.
  What is it that the National Football League, the 32 football club 
owners, and NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell have yet to understand why 
the word ``redskin'' is considered a very offensive racial and 
derogatory term that describes Native American Indians?
  My apologies, Mr. Speaker, for I have yet to master the English 
language. But I want to share again and again with my colleagues and 
some 181 million football fans all over America why our Native American 
Indian community considers the word ``redskin'' as very offensive, and 
clearly, the National Football League and NFL Commissioner Roger 
Goodell cannot and should not disclaim responsibility.
  Again, let's review the history. The origin of the term ``redskin'' 
is commonly attributed to the colonial practice of trading Native 
American Indian scalps and body parts as bounties and trophies. For 
example, in 1755, settlers of the Massachusetts Bay Province were paid 
out of the public treasury for the killing and scalping of people of 
the Penobscot tribe. The bounty for a male Penobscot Indian above the 
age of 12 was 50 pounds, and his scalp was worth 40 pounds. The bounty 
for a female Penobscot Indian of any age and for males under the age of 
12 was 25 pounds while their scalps were worth 20 pounds. These scalps, 
I submit, Mr. Speaker, were called ``redskins.''
  The current chairman and chief of the Penobscot Nation, Chief Kirk 
Francis, recently declared that the word ``redskin'' is ``not just a 
racial slur or a derogatory term,'' but a painful ``reminder of one of 
the most gruesome acts of . . . ethnic cleansing ever committed against 
the Penobscot people.''
  Mr. Speaker, again, I ask my colleagues and the 181 million football 
fans throughout this great Nation of ours--suppose that that redskins 
scalp that was brought in for payment was the scalp of your mother, 
your daughter, or your wife or your son? Again, Mr. Speaker, Native 
American Indians are also human beings and God's children. They are not 
animals.
  Our colleague, Tom Cole, from Oklahoma, the cochair of our 
Congressional Native American Indian Caucus and a member of the 
Chickasaw Nation, states:

       This is the 21st century. This is the capital of political 
     correctness on the planet. It is very, very, very offensive. 
     This isn't like warriors or chiefs. It's not a term of 
     respect, and it's needlessly offensive to a large part of our 
     population. They just don't happen to live around Washington, 
     D.C.

  Also, our colleague Betty McCollum from Minnesota, as cochair of the 
Congressional Native American Indian Caucus, says this ``is another 
attempt to justify a racial slur on behalf of Mr. Dan Snyder,'' the 
owner of the Washington franchise, ``and other NFL owners who appear to 
be only concerned with earning even larger profits, even if it means 
exploiting a racist stereotype of Native Americans. For the head of a 
multibillion dollar sports league to embrace the twisted logic that 
`redskin' actually `stands for strength, courage, pride, and respect,' 
is a statement of absurdity.''
  My dear friend and colleague, Eleanor Holmes Norton, representing the 
District of Columbia, states that the owner of the Washington football 
franchise, Mr. Dan Snyder, ``is a man who has shown sensibilities based 
on his own ethnic identity, yet who refuses to recognize the 
sensibilities of American Indians.''
  Ms. Norton also said:

       As an African American woman and third-generation 
     Washingtonian, I want to say to

[[Page 15406]]

     Redskin fans, no one blames you for using a name that has 
     always been used . . . but I can think of no argument for 
     retaining a name that degrades our first Americans.

  Mr. Speaker, the game of American football has become one of the most 
treasured sports among American Polynesian athletes. Polynesian youth 
learn to play the sport at a young age, with dreams of playing in the 
National Football League. Football offers opportunities for higher 
education and economic opportunity.
  Many of our Polynesian NFL players have realized their dreams, like 
Troy Polumalu, and Chris Kemoeatu of the Pittsburgh Steelers, the late 
Junior Seau, and now Manti Te'o of the San Diego Chargers, and the 
former player, Joe Salave'a, and Roy Helu, with the Washington 
Redskins.
  Mr. Speaker, I submit, let's do the right thing, and I appeal to the 
NFL, do the right thing. Change the name of the Washington football 
franchise.
  Mr. Speaker, I do not want to detract our attention from the current 
national debate on the government shutdown and the debt ceiling issue, 
but I want to share with my colleagues an issue that just will not go 
away. What is it that the National Football League, the 32 football 
club owners, and the NFL Commissioner Mr. Roger Goodell have yet to 
understand why the word ``redskin'' is considered a very offensive, 
racial and derogatory term that describes Native American Indians?
  My apologies, Mr. Speaker, for I have not yet mastered the English 
language--but I want to share again, and again with my colleagues and 
some 181 million football fans around the country--why our Native 
American Indian community considers the word ``redskin'' as very 
offensive, and clearly the National Football League, and NFL 
Commissioner Roger Goodell cannot and should not disclaim 
responsibility.
  Again, let's review the history. The origin of the term ``redskin'' 
is commonly attributed to the colonial practice of trading Native 
American Indian scalps and body parts as bounties and trophies. For 
example, in 1755, settlers of the Massachusetts Bay Province were paid 
out of the public treasury for killing and scalping people of the 
Penobscot tribe. The bounty for a male Penobscot Indian above the age 
of 12 was 50 pounds, and his scalp was worth 40 pounds. The bounty for 
a female Penobscot Indian of any age and for males under the age of 12 
was 25 pounds, while their scalps were worth 20 pounds. These scalps 
were called ``redskins.''
  The current chairman and chief of the Penobscot Nation, Chief Kirk 
Francis, recently declared that ``redskins'' is ``not just a racial 
slur or a derogatory term,'' but a painful ``reminder of one of the 
most gruesome acts of . . . ethnic cleansing ever committed against the 
Penobscot people.''
  Mr. Speaker, again I ask my colleagues and the 181 million football 
fans throughout this great Nation of ours--suppose that the ``redskin'' 
scalp that was brought in for payment was the scalp of your mother, 
your daughter, or your wife or son? Again, Mr. Speaker, Native American 
Indians are also human beings and God's children--they are not animals!
  Our colleague Tom Cole from Oklahoma, Co-Chair of the Congressional 
Native American Indian Caucus, and a member of the Chikasaw Nation, 
states: ``This is the 21st century. This is the capital of political 
correctness on the planet. It is very, very, very offensive. This isn't 
like warriors or chiefs. It's not a term of respect, and it's 
needlessly offensive to a large part of our population. They just don't 
happen to live around Washington, DC.''
  Also, our colleague Betty McCollum from Minnesota and Co-Chair of the 
Congressional Native American Indian Caucus, states that Mr. Goodell's 
letter ``is another attempt to justify a racial slur on behalf of [Mr.] 
Dan Snyder,'' owner of the Washington franchise, ``and other NFL owners 
who appear to be only concerned with earning even larger profits, even 
if it means exploiting a racist stereotype of Native Americans. For the 
head of a multi-billion dollar sports league to embrace the twisted 
logic that `[r]edskin' actually `stands for strength, courage pride, 
and respect' is a statement of absurdity.''
  My dear friend and colleague, Eleanor Holmes Norton, representing the 
District of Columbia, states that the owner of the Washington football 
franchise Mr. Daniel Snyder ``is a man who has shown sensibilities 
based on his own ethnic identity, [yet] who refuses to recognize the 
sensibilities of American Indians.'' Ms. Norton also said, ``As an 
African American woman and third-generation Washingtonian, I want to 
say to Redskins fans--no one blames you for using a name that has 
always been used . . . but I can think of no argument for retaining a 
name that degrades our first Americans.''
  Mr. Speaker, the game of American football has become one of the most 
treasured sports among American Polynesian athletes. Polynesian youth 
learn to play the sport at a young age with dreams of playing in the 
National Football League. Football offers an opportunity to enter the 
realm of higher education and economic opportunity. Many of our 
Polynesian NFL players have realized their dreams--like Troy Polumalu 
and former player Chris Kemoeatu of the Pittsburgh Steelers, the late 
Junior Seau and now Manti Te'o of the San Diego Chargers, former player 
Joe Salave'a and now Roy Helu, Jr. with the Washington ``Redskins,'' 
Haloti Ngata and former player Ma'ake Kemoeatu with the Baltimore 
Ravens, Isaac Sopoaga and former player Vai Sikahema with the 
Philadelphia Eagles, Tyson Alualu with the Jacksonville Jaguars, Samson 
Satele and Fill Moala with the Indianapolis Colts, Mike Iupati with the 
San Francisco 49ers, Ropati Pitoitua with the Tennessee Titans, Paul 
Soliai with the Miami Dolphins, and Domato Peko, Ray Maualuga, and 
former player Jonathan Fanene with the Cincinnati Bengals, and the list 
goes on and on, Mr. Speaker.
  Mr. Speaker, I love the game of football. I played all four years in 
high school. I love the NFL. But there is absolutely no excuse for the 
Washington professional football franchise to continue the shameful use 
of the word ``redskins.''
  Just last week, another island boy weighed in on the name of the 
Washington, DC football franchise. He is none other than our own 
President Barack Obama, born in Hawaii and who played basketball for 
Punahou High School in Honolulu, Hawaii, and he said: ``If I were the 
owner of the team and I knew that the name of my team--even if they've 
had a storied history--was offending a sizable group of people, I'd 
think about changing it.'' President Obama further said: ``Native 
Americans feel pretty strongly about it . . . I don't know whether our 
attachment to a particular name should override the real, legitimate 
concerns that people have about these things.''
  While race-based killing of Native Americans is a thing of the past, 
the tradition of mockery and insult--whether intentional or not--lives 
on through the Washington ``Redskins,'' a name that American Indian 
rights activist Ms. Suzan Harjo calls ``the worst thing in the English 
language you can be called if you are a native person.'' This is not a 
popularity contest. You don't take polls on issues with deep moral 
implications. That is just absolute nonsense.
  For those who question whether this racist or derogatory word is 
offensive to Native Americans, I want to share with my colleagues an 
excerpt from a letter sent by the leaders and members of the National 
Congress of American Indians (NCAI)--the oldest, largest, and most 
representative American Indian and Alaska Native organization serving 
the broad interests of the majority of some 5 million Native Americans 
with well over 500 tribal governments and communities across the 
nation. In the letter, NCAI President Jefferson Keel of the Chikasaw 
Nation from Oklahoma states that Congressional efforts on this issue 
``will accomplish what Native American people, nations, and 
organizations have tried to do in the courts for almost twenty years--
end the racist epithet that has served as the [name] of Washington's 
pro football franchise for far too long.''
  Mr. Speaker, the term ``redskin'' does not, as NFL Commissioner Roger 
Goodell suggests, offend just one person. And the responsibility for 
perpetuating this racial slur, as Mr. Goodell implies, lies not just 
with Mr. Dan Snyder, the owner of the Washington football franchise. 
The responsibility rests squarely on the National Football League and 
the 32 owners of their football teams, and NFL Commissioner Roger 
Goodell.
  As for the ``Redskins'' sponsors--such as FedEx, Virginia Lottery, 
Sprint Nextel, Coca-Cola, Bank of America, Anheuser-Busch, and others--
they are equally accountable for the continued use of this disparaging 
term. Their silence on the issue given their direct contribution to 
this racist and derogatory word is deafening.
  Again, I ask NFL Commissioner Goodell and the 32 club owners--do the 
right thing--change the name of the Washington football franchise.
  I submit for the record a letter from the National Congress of 
American Indians; and today's commentary from two articles in the 
Washington Post authored by Mr. Dana Milbank, Ms. Theresa Vargas and 
Mr. Mark Maske.

[[Page 15407]]

                                              National Congress of


                                             American Indians,

                                                   March 21, 2013.
     Hon. Eni Faleomavaega,
     House of Representatives,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Representative Faleomavaega: On behalf of the National 
     Congress of American Indians (NCAI), the nation's oldest and 
     largest tribal government advocacy organization in the 
     country, we applaud you for sponsoring the ``Non-
     Disparagement of Native American Persons or People in 
     Trademark Registration Act of 2013''. This legislation will 
     accomplish what Native American people, nations, and 
     organizations have tried to do in the courts for almost 
     twenty years--end the racist epithet that has served as the 
     mascot of Washington's pro football franchise for far too 
     long.
       The NCAI membership has been an active part of ending these 
     types of derogatory stereotypes for several decades. The NCAI 
     was one of many native and non-native organizations in 
     support of the original court cases on this matter, Harjo et 
     al v. Pro Football, Inc., and we support the current case, 
     Blackhorse et al v. Pro Football, Inc., to cancel existing 
     trademarks.
       We are proud of all our people who struggle for dignity and 
     fight against stereotypes, including Native and non-Native 
     students, families, teachers, and others who have worked 
     together to retire over 2,000 ``Indian'' names, logos, 
     mascots, and behaviors in schools across the land. The use of 
     Native Peoples as mascots is offensive and unjustifiable. We 
     will continue to call for an end to this practice until the 
     remaining stereotypes are gone from the American landscape.
       Thank you and your co-sponsors for your leadership and 
     courage in introducing this important legislation. If you 
     have any questions regarding this matter, please contact me 
     or the NCAI Deputy Director, Robert Holden, at the National 
     Congress of American Indians.
           Respectfully,
                                                   Jefferson Keel,
                                                        President.
                                 ______
                                 

                [From the Washington Post, Oct. 8, 2013]

               For the Redskins, What's in a Name? Plenty

                           (By Dana Milbank)

       You know a guy is in trouble when he hires Lanny Davis as 
     his lawyer.
       Davis has developed a specialty representing Third World 
     dictators and questionable businesses since his days as a 
     spokesman for Bill Clinton during the Monica Lewinsky 
     scandal. So when Davis's name appeared on a statement from 
     the Washington Redskins on Saturday afternoon declaring that 
     President Obama was wrong to question the team's name, it was 
     a sure sign that Dan Snyder is worried.
       Davis, brought in this summer to help with the team-name 
     controversy, expressed his disappointment ``as a supporter of 
     President Obama'' that Obama was not aware of a decade-old 
     poll finding that only one in 10 Native Americans were 
     offended by the name. ``We love our team and its name,'' he 
     wrote, and ``we do not intend to disparage or disrespect a 
     racial or ethnic group.''
       I like Davis and admire his creativity, but, to borrow a 
     Clinton-era phrase, let's parse this statement. Are the 
     Redskins really defending the name with an out-of-date survey 
     that allowed anybody--even somebody with less native blood 
     than Elizabeth Warren--to identify as a Native American? And 
     even if those results were accurate, are Davis and Snyder 
     suggesting that racism is okay if it polls well?
       To see whether it's right to use ``Redskins'' as a mascot, 
     NFL owners gathering in Georgetown on Tuesday for their Fall 
     meeting should substitute some other common racial epithets 
     and see how they would sound: The Washington Wetbacks? The 
     Houston Hymies? The Chicago Chinks'? Or perhaps the New York 
     Niggers? That would be enough to send anybody to the shotgun 
     formation.
       ``This word is an insult. It's mean, it's rude, it's 
     impolite,'' Kevin Gover, who is Native American and director 
     of the Smithsonian's National Museum of the American Indian, 
     said Monday at a news conference on the eve of the NFL 
     meeting. ``We've noticed that other racial insults are out of 
     bounds. . . . We wonder why it is that the word that is 
     directed at us, that refers to us, is not similarly off-
     limits.''
       Gover was part of a gathering arranged by the Oneida Nation 
     at the Ritz-Carlton, the site of the owners meeting. The 
     tribe has been running radio ads calling for a name change, 
     and the cause got a boost when Obama said in an interview 
     with the Associated Press on Saturday that he'd think about 
     changing the name if he were in Snyder's shoes. Snyder is on 
     record telling USA Today: `We'll never change the name. It's 
     that simple. Never--you can use caps.''
       Actually, forget the Caps; let's use the Bullets, who 
     became the Washington Wizards to avoid using what was a less 
     offensive word than Redskins. Davis decries the ``selective'' 
     outrage against the Redskins but not the Atlanta Braves or 
     the Cleveland Indians or the Chicago Blackhawks. The Braves' 
     Tomahawk Chop and Cleveland's Chief Wahoo are indeed 
     appalling, but the team names aren't epithets.
       ``We're asking the NFL to stop using a racial slur,'' said 
     Ray Halbritter, representing the Oneida Nation.
       The best argument was made not by a Native American but by 
     an African American, the District of Columbia's delegate to 
     Congress, Eleanor Holmes Norton. ``My great-grandfather was a 
     runaway slave,'' she said. ``I went to segregated schools, 
     just like many Native Americans. . . . I don't see how anyone 
     who has gone through our historic experience can fail to 
     identify with Native Americans who are raising this issue. 
     Need I remind them of the terms that have been attached to us 
     in history and how the moment we hear one of those terms, 
     you've got an uprising?''
       That makes Davis's defense sound all the more trivial. 
     ``The name `Washington Redskins' is 80 years old--it's our 
     history and legacy and tradition,'' his statement said--as 
     though that trumps the Native Americans' history and legacy 
     and tradition.
       Norton predicted that the offensive name won't last much 
     longer. ``The name is going to go in the dustbin of 
     history,'' she said. ``My only regret is that Dan Snyder, the 
     owner of the team, had to be pushed this far.''
       If Snyder feels otherwise, perhaps he can start making his 
     way to history's dustbin, and a new owner can change the 
     name. Maybe then we'd win some football games.
       Make your case: Should the Washington Redskins change their 
     name?
                                 ______
                                 

                [From the Washington Post, Oct. 8, 2013]

 Indian Tribe Pushes for Washington Redskins Name Change as NFL Owners 
                                 Gather

                   (By Theresa Vargas and Mark Maske)

       NFL officials will meet with the Native American group that 
     is campaigning against the name of the Washington Redskins 
     and hosted a symposium Monday on the issue a mile away from 
     where league owners began gathering for a fall meeting.
       ``They know we're not going away,'' said Ray Halblitter, a 
     representative for the Oneida Indian Nation. He called the 
     meeting with the National Football League ``a move in the 
     right direction.''
       The symposium comes three days after President Obama took a 
     stance in the long-standing debate, saying that if he were 
     the team's owner, he would think about changing the name.
       The Oneida Nation launched the ``Change the Mascot'' 
     campaign a few months ago, drawing inspiration from a high 
     school in its back yard that dropped the ``Redskins'' 
     moniker. Since then, the New York tribe has emerged as one of 
     the strongest forces behind the growing push to scrap the 
     Washington team's 80-year-old name, scheduling radio ads to 
     run in every city the Redskins visit this season.
       Its conference, held at the Ritz-Carlton in Georgetown, 
     featured a panel of speakers that included the head of the 
     Snithsonian's National Museum of the American Indian, a 
     psychologist who spoke about the public health consequences 
     of the word, student activists and politicians--Rep. Betty 
     McCollum (D-Minn.) and Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-D.C.).
       ``I can think of no argument for retaining a name that 
     directly insults Americans and especially our first 
     Americans,'' said Holmes Norton, speaking as a third-
     generation Washingtonian.
       She said NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell showed leadership 
     last month when he stepped back from his earlier defense of 
     the team's name and said, ``If one person's offended, we have 
     to listen.''
       Nevertheless, no formal discussion of the Washington 
     Redskins' name is expected among NFL owners who are gathering 
     at another Ritz-Carlton in Washington for a one-day meeting 
     Tuesday, according to two people familiar with the situation, 
     who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the 
     sensitivity of the topic.
       They said they sense little or no sentiment within the 
     league to urge Redskins owner Daniel Snyder to make a change.
       NFL officials were invited to the Native American 
     symposium, but none attended the event, Halbritter said. But 
     he said he was encouraged that Goodell had instructed Adolpho 
     Birch, the NFL's senior vice president for labor policy and 
     government affairs, to schedule a meeting. The sit-down is 
     scheduled for Nov. 22 at the league's offices, but two 
     sources said it could be held sooner.
       On Monday, as NFL franchise owners began arriving for their 
     Tuesday gathering, several declined comment on the name-
     change issue.
       Green Bay Packers President Mark Murphy, who once played 
     for the Redskins, was the athletic director at Colgate when 
     the school changed the name of its athletic teams from Red 
     Raiders to Raiders in 2001. But he declined to speak Monday 
     on the controversy.
       ``I'd rather not get into it,'' Murphy said.
       Philadelphia Eagles owner Jeffrey Lurie also declined to 
     comment.
       In May, Redskins owner Daniel Snyder told USA Today, 
     ``We'll never change the name. It's that simple. NEVER--you 
     can use caps.''
       In the months since, a string of prominent sports writers 
     has stop penning the word. A group led by a former Federal 
     Communications Commission chairman announced an

[[Page 15408]]

     effort to persuade broadcasters to stop saying the name on 
     the airwaves. And a decision is expected soon in a lawsuit 
     aimed at revoking the federal trademark protection of the 
     team's name.
       Kevin Gover, who heads the American Indian museum and whose 
     son is a plaintiff in the trademark case, said the Oneida 
     Nation has long been a powerful force in the American Indian 
     community and that the tribe's involvement in the name-change 
     issue has only elevated the conversation. He said he has 
     little doubt that NFL officials, even if none attended the 
     symposium, were listening to what was said.
       ``Like all major industries, the NFL is very interested in 
     its public image,'' Gover said, ``and when there is a 
     challenge to that public image, the NFL is inclined to 
     respond.''
       During Monday's event, Gover--who wrote a letter to The 
     Washington Post about the offensiveness of the name when he 
     was a high school senior in 1973--spoke about how as a child 
     he was called ``redskin'' and doesn't understand why, unlike 
     other racial slurs, the word has not become off limits.
       Michael Friedman, a clinical psychologist who has 
     researched the effects of stigma and discrimination, said the 
     word amounts to harassment and causes mental and physical 
     harm to a population that already faces higher rates of 
     depression, alcoholism, suicide, diabetes and infant 
     mortality.
       ``This is a public health issue,'' he said. 'This is not a 
     political correctness issue.''
       Also on the panel were two students from Cooperstown High 
     School and the school board's president, who earlier this 
     year were behind the decision to change the school's team 
     from the Redskins to the Hawkeyes. The Oneida Nation later 
     paid for the school's new uniforms.
       The tribe, which has about 1,000 members, has prospered in 
     the casino and resort business and has pledged $10 million 
     over 10 years to the American Indian museum.
       The tribe also sponsors the Buffalo Bills and has a 
     ``vested interest in the league being a unifying force,'' 
     Habritter said.
       ``As an Indian nation that values the idea of mutual 
     respect, we only have one simple objective in all of this,'' 
     Habritter said. ``We no longer want to be treated as targets 
     of racial slurs. We don't want our children to be treated as 
     targets of racial slurs. We want to be treated as what we 
     are: Americans.''
                                 ______
                                 

                [From the Washington Post, Oct. 8, 2013]

                         Tackling the Offensive

                           (By Dana Milbank)

       You know a guy is in trouble when he hires Lanny Davis as 
     his lawyer.
       Davis has developed a specialty representing Third World 
     dictators and questionable businesses since his days as a 
     spokesman for Bill Clinton during the Monica Lewinsky 
     scandal. So when Davis's name appeared on a statement from 
     the Washington Redskins on Saturday afternoon declaring that 
     President Obama was wrong to question the team's name, it was 
     a sure sign that Dan Snyder is worried.
       Davis, brought in this summer to help with the team-name 
     controversy, expressed his disappointment ``as a supporter of 
     President Obama'' that Obama was not aware of a decade-old 
     poll finding that only one in 10 Native Americans were 
     offended by the name. ``We love our team and its name;'' he 
     wrote, and ``we do not intend to disparage or disrespect a 
     racial or ethnic group.''
       I like Davis and admire his creativity, but, to borrow a 
     Clinton-era phrase, let's parse this statement. Are the 
     Redskins really defending the name with an out-of-date survey 
     that allowed anybody--even somebody with less native blood 
     than Elizabeth Warren--to identify as a Native American? And 
     even if those results were accurate, are Davis and Snyder 
     suggesting that racism is okay if it polls well?
       To see whether it's right to use ``Redskins'' as a mascot, 
     NFL owners gathering in Georgetown on Tuesday for their fall 
     meeting should substitute some other common racial epithets 
     for Hispanics, African Americans, Asians and Jews and see how 
     they would sound. That would be enough to send anybody to the 
     shotgun formation.
       ``This word is an insult. It's mean, it's rude, it's 
     impolite,'' Kevin Gover, who is Native American and director 
     of the Smithsonian's National Museum of the American Indian, 
     said Monday at a news conference on the eve of the NFL 
     meeting. ``We've noticed that other racial insults are out of 
     bounds. . . . We wonder why it is that the word that is 
     directed at us, that refers to us, is not similarly off-
     limits.''
       Gover was part of a gathering arranged by the Oneida Nation 
     at the Ritz-Carlton, the site of the owners meeting. The 
     tribe has been running radio ads calling for a name change, 
     and the cause got a boost when Obama said in an interview 
     with the Associated Press on Saturday that he'd think about 
     changing the name if he were in Snyder's shoes. Snyder is on 
     record telling USA Today: ``We'll never change the name. It's 
     that simple. Never--you can use caps.''
       Actually, forget the Caps; let's use the Bullets, who 
     became the Washington Wizards to avoid using what was a less 
     offensive word than Redskins. Davis decries the ``selective'' 
     outrage against the Redskins but not the Atlanta Braves or 
     the Cleveland Indians or the Chicago Blackhawks. The Braves' 
     Tomahawk Chop and Cleveland Chief Wahoo are indeed appalling, 
     but the team names aren't epithets.
       ``We're asking the NFL to stop using a racial slur,'' said 
     Ray Halbritter, representing the Oneida Nation.
       The best argument was made not by a Native American but by 
     an African American, the District of Columbia's delegate to 
     Congress, Eleanor Holmes Norton. ``My great-grandfather was a 
     runaway slave,'' she said. ``I went to segregated schools, 
     just like many Native Americans. . . . I don't see how anyone 
     who has gone through our historic experience can fail to 
     identify with Native Americans who are raising this issue. 
     Need I remind them of the terms that have been attached to us 
     in history and how the moment we hear one of those terms, 
     you've got an uprising?''
       That makes Davis's defense sound all the more trivial. 
     ``The name `Washington Redskins' is 80 years old--it's our 
     history and legacy and tradition,'' his statement said--as 
     though that trumps the Native Americans' history and legacy 
     and tradition.
       Norton predicted that the offensive name won't last much 
     longer. ``The name is going to go in the dustbin of 
     history,'' she said. ``My only regret is that Dan Snyder, the 
     owner of the team, had to be pushed this far.''
       If Snyder feels otherwise, perhaps he can start making his 
     way to history's dustbin, and a new owner can change the 
     name. Maybe then we'd win some football games.
                                 ______
                                 

                  NFL To Meet Tribe Over Redskins Name

                   (By Theresa Vargas and Mark Maske)

       NFL officials will meet with the Native American group that 
     is campaigning against the name of the Washington Redskins 
     and hosted a symposium Monday on the issue a mile away from 
     where league owners began gathering for a fall meeting.
       ``They know we're not going away,'' said Ray Halbritter, a 
     representative for the Oneida Indian Nation. He called the 
     meeting with the National Football League ``a move in the 
     right direction.''
       The symposium comes three days after President Obama took a 
     stance in the long-standing debate, saying that if he were 
     the team's owner, he would think about changing the name.
       The Oneida Nation launched the ``Change the Mascot'' 
     campaign a few months ago, drawing inspiration from a high 
     school in its back yard that dropped the ``Redskins'' 
     moniker. Since then, the New York tribe has emerged as one of 
     the strongest forces behind the growing push to scrap the 
     Washington team's 80-year-old name, scheduling radio ads to 
     run in every city the Redskins visit this season.
       Its conference, held at the Ritz-Carlton in Georgetown, 
     featured a panel of speakers that included the head of the 
     Smithsonian's National Museum of the American Indian, a 
     psychologist who spoke about the public health consequences 
     of the word, student activists and politicians--Rep. Betty 
     McCollum (D-Minn.) and Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-D.C.).
       ``I can think of no argument for retaining a name that 
     directly insults Americans and especially our first 
     Americans,'' said Holmes Norton, speaking as a third-
     generation Washingtonian.
       She said NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell showed leadership 
     last month when he stepped back from his earlier defense of 
     the team's name and said, ``If one person's offended, we have 
     to listen.''
       Nevertheless, no formal discussion of the Washington 
     Redskins' name is expected among NFL owners who are gathering 
     at another Ritz-Carlton in Washington for a one-day meeting 
     Tuesday, according to two people familiar with the situation, 
     who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the 
     sensitivity of the topic.
       They said they sense little or no sentiment within the 
     league to urge Redskins owner Daniel Snyder to make a change.
       NFL officials were invited to the Native American 
     symposium, but none attended the event, Halbritter said. But 
     he said he was encouraged that Goodell had instructed Adolpho 
     Birch, the NFL's senior vice president for labor policy and 
     government affairs, to schedule a meeting. The sit-down is 
     scheduled for Nov. 22 at the league's offices, but two 
     sources said it could be held sooner.
       On Monday, as NFL franchise owners began arriving for their 
     Tuesday gathering, several declined to comment on the name-
     change issue.
       Green Bay Packers President Mark Murphy, who once played 
     for the Redskins, was the athletic director at Colgate when 
     the school changed the name of its athletic teams from Red 
     Raiders to Raiders in 2001. But he declined to speak Monday 
     on the controversy.
       ``I'd rather not get into it,'' Murphy said.
       Philadelphia Eagles owner Jeffrey Lurie also declined to 
     comment.
       In May, Redskins owner Daniel Snyder told USA Today, 
     ``We'll never change the name. It's that simple. NEVER--you 
     can use caps.''
       In the months since, a string of prominent sports writers 
     has stopped penning the name. A group led by a former Federal 
     Communications Commission chairman announced an

[[Page 15409]]

     effort to persuade broadcasters to stop saying the name on 
     the airwaves. And a decision is expected soon in a lawsuit 
     aimed at revoking the federal trademark protection of the 
     team's name.
       Kevin Gover, who heads the American Indian museum and whose 
     son is a plaintiff in the trademark case, said the Oneida 
     Nation has long been a powerful force in the American Indian 
     community and that the tribe's involvement in the name-change 
     issue has only elevated the conversation. He said he has 
     little doubt that NFL officials, even if none attended the 
     symposium, were listening to what was said.
       ``Like all major industries, the NFL is very interested in 
     its public image,'' Gover said, ``and when there is a 
     challenge to that public image, the NFL is inclined to 
     respond?'
       During Monday's event, Gover--who wrote a letter to The 
     Washington Post about the offensiveness of the name when he 
     was a high school senior in 1973--spoke about how as a child 
     he was called ``redskin'' and doesn't understand why, unlike 
     other racial slurs, the word has not become off limits.
       Michael Friedman, a clinical psychologist who has 
     researched the effects of stigma and discrimination, said the 
     word amounts to harassment and causes mental and physical 
     harm to a population that already faces higher rates of 
     depression, alcoholism, suicide, diabetes and infant 
     mortality.
       ``This is a public health issue,'' he said. ``This is not a 
     political correctness issue.''
       Also on the panel were two students from Cooperstown High 
     School and the school board's president, who earlier this 
     year were behind the decision to change the school's team 
     from the Redskins to the Hawkeyes. The Oneida Nation later 
     paid for the school's new uniforms.
       The tribe, which has about 1,000 members, has prospered in 
     the casino and resort business and has pledged $10 million 
     over 10 years to the American Indian museum.
       The tribe also sponsors the Buffalo Bills and has a 
     ``vested interest in the league being a unifying force,'' 
     Halbritter said.
       ``As an Indian nation that values the idea of mutual 
     respect, we only have one simple objective in all of this,'' 
     Halbritter said. ``We no longer want to be treated as targets 
     of racial slurs. We don't want our children to be treated as 
     targets of racial slurs. We want to be treated as what we 
     are: Americans.''

                          ____________________