Looks like Congress is going to involve itself with the issue. From the Chronicle of Higher Education:
Bill Introduced in Congress Would Limit NCAA's Power to Enforce Penalties for Mascots
[SIZE=-1]By JENNIFER JACOBSON[/SIZE]
Lawmakers from states where university athletics-team mascots have caused controversy have introduced legislation in Congress that would limit the ability of the National Collegiate Athletic Association to crack down on colleges with offensive American Indian mascots and nicknames. The bill would also allow colleges to sue the association if it punishes them for violations of its mascot policy.
The speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives, Rep. J. Dennis Hastert, and a fellow Illinois Republican, Rep. Timothy V. Johnson, introduced the bill, known as the Protection of University Governance Act (HR 5289), last week. The bill's other cosponsors are Rep. Dan Boren, of Oklahoma; Rep. Allen Boyd, of Florida; and Jerry F. Costello of Illinois, all Democrats.
"The NCAA was established as a sports-management association," Mr. Johnson said in a statement posted on his Web site. "The organization has since assumed the mantle of social arbiters. They need to go back to scheduling ballgames and leave the social engineering to others."
NCAA officials were not available for comment on the proposed legislation over the weekend.
The legislation's introduction came roughly one week after the NCAA denied appeals that three institutions -- Indiana University of Pennsylvania, the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, and the University of North Dakota -- had submitted to oppose sanctions they faced for their American Indian logos and nicknames (The Chronicle, May 1).
Under the sanctions, the University of North Dakota cannot use its "Fighting Sioux" nickname or logo on team uniforms in postseason play and cannot serve as host for any postseason competitions, according to Don Kojich, a university spokesman.
The University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign's mascot, Chief Illiniwek, does not travel to away games, and his image does not appear on team uniforms, said Thomas Hardy, a university spokesman. Therefore, the sanction against holding NCAA championships is the only one that applies to his institution, he said.
Both spokesmen said that their universities had exhausted their appeals to the association and that litigation against the NCAA was an option. Neither said he knew much about the legislation or whether it would help his institution. "On the surface, it's something that could be beneficial," Mr. Kojich said.
A few institutions in states represented by the bill's cosponsors have escaped NCAA penalties after facing sanctions initially.
Florida State University had been on a list of 18 institutions whose mascots and nicknames were considered "hostile and abusive" when the NCAA issued its policy last August (The Chronicle, August 5, 2005). But the NCAA later removed Florida State from the list because it could show that the Seminole tribe of Florida had approved the university's use of the "Seminoles" nickname (The Chronicle, August 24, 2005).
Other institutions have been removed from the list for similar reasons, and one, Bradley University, in Illinois, has won an appeal to the association.
Some institutions that faced sanctions have adopted new nicknames. For instance, in January, Southeastern Oklahoma State University changed the name of its team from "Savages" to "Savage Storm."
According to the statement posted on Representative Johnson's Web site, the bill would limit the NCAA's ability to impose sanctions on colleges "by reason of a team name, symbol, emblem or mascot" and would allow colleges penalized for such reasons to sue the organization and get court orders to stop such action.
"Any attempt by an entity that regulates intercollegiate sports activities to impose its view of correct social policy on institutions of higher education participating in such activities is inimical to the traditions of higher education in America and is inconsistent with university governance and academic freedom," the statement quotes the proposed legislation as saying. "Attempts to regulate institutions in this manner detract from the diversity of America and the independence of thought and spirit that are the essence of higher education in this nation."
Mr. Johnson also hailed the bill's bipartisanship. "This is not a Republican grievance or a Democratic grievance," he said. "The NCAA's presumed authority is a grievance against us all."
Bill Introduced in Congress Would Limit NCAA's Power to Enforce Penalties for Mascots
[SIZE=-1]By JENNIFER JACOBSON[/SIZE]
Lawmakers from states where university athletics-team mascots have caused controversy have introduced legislation in Congress that would limit the ability of the National Collegiate Athletic Association to crack down on colleges with offensive American Indian mascots and nicknames. The bill would also allow colleges to sue the association if it punishes them for violations of its mascot policy.
The speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives, Rep. J. Dennis Hastert, and a fellow Illinois Republican, Rep. Timothy V. Johnson, introduced the bill, known as the Protection of University Governance Act (HR 5289), last week. The bill's other cosponsors are Rep. Dan Boren, of Oklahoma; Rep. Allen Boyd, of Florida; and Jerry F. Costello of Illinois, all Democrats.
"The NCAA was established as a sports-management association," Mr. Johnson said in a statement posted on his Web site. "The organization has since assumed the mantle of social arbiters. They need to go back to scheduling ballgames and leave the social engineering to others."
NCAA officials were not available for comment on the proposed legislation over the weekend.
The legislation's introduction came roughly one week after the NCAA denied appeals that three institutions -- Indiana University of Pennsylvania, the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, and the University of North Dakota -- had submitted to oppose sanctions they faced for their American Indian logos and nicknames (The Chronicle, May 1).
Under the sanctions, the University of North Dakota cannot use its "Fighting Sioux" nickname or logo on team uniforms in postseason play and cannot serve as host for any postseason competitions, according to Don Kojich, a university spokesman.
The University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign's mascot, Chief Illiniwek, does not travel to away games, and his image does not appear on team uniforms, said Thomas Hardy, a university spokesman. Therefore, the sanction against holding NCAA championships is the only one that applies to his institution, he said.
Both spokesmen said that their universities had exhausted their appeals to the association and that litigation against the NCAA was an option. Neither said he knew much about the legislation or whether it would help his institution. "On the surface, it's something that could be beneficial," Mr. Kojich said.
A few institutions in states represented by the bill's cosponsors have escaped NCAA penalties after facing sanctions initially.
Florida State University had been on a list of 18 institutions whose mascots and nicknames were considered "hostile and abusive" when the NCAA issued its policy last August (The Chronicle, August 5, 2005). But the NCAA later removed Florida State from the list because it could show that the Seminole tribe of Florida had approved the university's use of the "Seminoles" nickname (The Chronicle, August 24, 2005).
Other institutions have been removed from the list for similar reasons, and one, Bradley University, in Illinois, has won an appeal to the association.
Some institutions that faced sanctions have adopted new nicknames. For instance, in January, Southeastern Oklahoma State University changed the name of its team from "Savages" to "Savage Storm."
According to the statement posted on Representative Johnson's Web site, the bill would limit the NCAA's ability to impose sanctions on colleges "by reason of a team name, symbol, emblem or mascot" and would allow colleges penalized for such reasons to sue the organization and get court orders to stop such action.
"Any attempt by an entity that regulates intercollegiate sports activities to impose its view of correct social policy on institutions of higher education participating in such activities is inimical to the traditions of higher education in America and is inconsistent with university governance and academic freedom," the statement quotes the proposed legislation as saying. "Attempts to regulate institutions in this manner detract from the diversity of America and the independence of thought and spirit that are the essence of higher education in this nation."
Mr. Johnson also hailed the bill's bipartisanship. "This is not a Republican grievance or a Democratic grievance," he said. "The NCAA's presumed authority is a grievance against us all."
Upvote
0
