[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 159 (2013), Part 9]
[House]
[Page 12522]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




   THE NAME OF NFL'S WASHINGTON FOOTBALL FRANCHISE SHOULD BE CHANGED

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from 
American Samoa (Mr. Faleomavaega) for 5 minutes.
  Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Speaker, it's me again. I rise today on behalf 
of our Native American community to speak on a subject of great 
concern--the use of the term ``redskins'' by the National Football 
League's Washington franchise.
  Recently, our nationally recognized commentator, Mr. Rush Limbaugh, 
attempted to wash away years of pain, suffering, and humiliation 
endured by our Nation's first inhabitants by questioning their motives 
in seeking to rid the NFL of this most racist, disparaging, and 
patently offensive word.
  As with most of the non-Native American general public, Mr. Limbaugh 
does not appear to know the violent and abusive history behind this 
racial epithet. I would like to take this opportunity to provide Mr. 
Limbaugh and the American people some much-needed clarity on the 
subject.
  You see, Mr. Speaker, much of the outcry over the name of the NFL's 
football franchise is due, in large part, to the Federal Government's 
protection of disparaging trademarks granted to the franchise for the 
Redskins. Governing Federal law established since 1946 requires that 
the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office deny registration for any such 
words.
  The origin of the term ``redskins,'' Mr. Speaker, is commonly 
attributed to the historical act of not only killing Native Americans, 
but also cutting off certain body parts and scalping the heads of even 
women and children as evidence and are then paid by the colonial 
officials. These scalps, Mr. Speaker, were described as redskins.
  I submit, Mr. Speaker, Native Americans are human beings; they are 
not animals. Despite this most despicable act of genocide against the 
Native American people, the U.S. Patent Office in 1967 granted the 
NFL's Washington football franchise a federally registered trademark 
for the same word. Mr. Speaker, this should never have happened. Native 
American nations have treaty and trust relations with the Federal 
Government as is clearly recognized by the Supreme Court of the U.S. 
Constitution.
  Sixty-six years after the law was established, the word ``redskins'' 
continues to enjoy such protections. In fact, the NFL's Washington 
football franchise has six federally registered trademarks for the same 
word. This was not the work of the Native American community, which Mr. 
Limbaugh calls ``a bunch of PC jerks.'' It was the work of a Federal 
agency that ignored the law and its duty to shield our Native peoples 
from degrading trademark registration.
  Mr. Limbaugh asks: ``Why does the Federal Government have to get 
involved?'' With due respect, Mr. Speaker, the Federal Government is 
part of the problem. After years of pleading with the NFL, with the 
Washington franchise owner Mr. Dan Snyder, with the Trademark Trial and 
Appeal Board, with the D.C. District Court, and with the D.C. Court of 
Appeals, the Native American community is left right where they 
started--with a $1.6 billion football franchise freely exploiting the 
shameful memory of the ethnic cleansing that was forced upon the Native 
American people.
  Mr. Limbaugh also states: ``So the Redskins may not be a popular name 
with some people.'' Mr. Speaker, I submit this is not a popularity 
contest. It is not even about sports. This is a moral issue that 
reaches far back to the time when Native Americans were not only 
considered outcasts, but deemed ``enemies, rebels, and traitors'' by 
the colonial government. The only sporting involved was the game of 
hunting and killing Indians like animals for money.
  To Mr. Limbaugh, to Mr. Snyder, to Mr. Goodell, and all NFL club 
owners, I ask: Haven't American Indians suffered enough? Have they not 
paid the price placed on their heads, their scalps, their skins? Mr. 
Speaker, I think the answer is clear. Enough is enough.

                          ____________________