CO-04 (Special Election)
See Full Big Line
(R) Greg Lopez
(R) Trisha Calvarese
90%
10%
President (To Win Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Biden*
(R) Donald Trump
80%
20%↓
CO-01 (Denver)
See Full Big Line
(D) Diana DeGette*
90%
CO-02 (Boulder-ish)
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Neguse*
90%
CO-03 (West & Southern CO)
See Full Big Line
(D) Adam Frisch
(R) Jeff Hurd
(R) Ron Hanks
40%
30%
20%
CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(R) Lauren Boebert
(R) Deborah Flora
(R) J. Sonnenberg
30%↑
15%↑
10%↓
CO-05 (Colorado Springs)
See Full Big Line
(R) Dave Williams
(R) Jeff Crank
50%↓
50%↑
CO-06 (Aurora)
See Full Big Line
(D) Jason Crow*
90%
CO-07 (Jefferson County)
See Full Big Line
(D) Brittany Pettersen
85%↑
CO-08 (Northern Colo.)
See Full Big Line
(D) Yadira Caraveo
(R) Gabe Evans
(R) Janak Joshi
60%↑
35%↓
30%↑
State Senate Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
80%
20%
State House Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
95%
5%
January 25, 2010 09:59 PM UTC
32 Comments
You mean this bill really does have merit in your opinion. You just want to shove it down peoples throats when they can’t make your party pay for it.
Wow, how very principled of you.
When, oh when, will we realize that electing a legislature, and then having that legislature enact a law, is the height of tyranny! When will the people (and their throats!) have a say again in this country of ours?!
That there are so many people who think that these logos and mascots are OK for our schools to have. “Let it be local control” is all well and good–and don’t mistake my comment here to be disagreeing with Pols’ greater point about it being a political miscalculation–but at some point we have to say enough to state-sponsored racism for sports teams.
America has a way of continuously subjugating Native Americans, and will likely continue to do so for years and years. Perhaps more so than any other minority group. Does anyone think that this bill would be an issue if it was trying to make it so schools couldn’t be, say, the Boulder High Hooknosed Kikes with a logo of a green-skinned stereotypically racist Jew? Or the Broomfield High Blackskins with a logo straight out of Stephen A. Foster’s minstrel show posters?
Why is it that racism against some groups is abhorrent, but racism against other groups shouldn’t be legislated and should be left up to local school boards?
but this is not the time. This plays perfectly into Dems as latte sippers who are more concerned with political correctness than with the little guy. We have to take care of the imminent disaster first, not because we don’t recognize the legitimate grievances of Native Americans but because it’s an imminent disaster! It’s the first rule of triage. So please, no more legislation on logos or anything else right now that isn’t focused like a laser on our many imminent disasters.
I’m just trying to have a conversation about why people are okay with some forms of racism more than they are okay with others.
My guess is that the reason stems from the fact that Native Americans have absolutely no political power in this country because of how successful the American government has been at subjugating them.
There’s a time and place for every issue and now’s not the time to delve into anything that doesn’t help the economy and adds jobs.
Schools are governmental entities and shouldn’t be dissing ethnic groups. It doesn’t sound like either the time or the method is right though.
You mean Barbara is actually bitching that she would actually have something to do????
extra work for the one guy on Indian Affairs. It’s not fair to give him a bunch of new work with no more budget, when he is already busy.
and we pick….Timmy ! Timmy can you make sure all that “indian affairs” stuff gets taken care of ? Atta boy. OK, great, next item on the agenda.
this morning. The sooner this bill is shelved the better. And I’d like to add that I agree with RSB’s comment above–I can’t believe how many schools still have these mascots and haven’t taken their own initiative to get rid of them.
If it were my kids’ school I’d be agitating for a change. I doubt BVSD is the big problem here, however.
I seem to recall a few years ago there was a school named after a specific tribe, and they checked with that tribe whether it was respectful and acceptable to keep the name (and I think it was).
why don’t the legislators involved send each of the schools in Colo that have these types of logos a letter requesting them to examine the issue in consultation with a local tribe or tribes and/or Native American advocacy group and issue a BRIEF report on the findings.
If they refuse, then slap the law on them next year. Wouldn’t that be the most constructive way to go ?
IF the “mascot” issue involved any other ethnic group, religion, or nationality … any other one at all! … would this also “not be the time”? Should combating institutional racism be reserved for non-election years, to give the electorate a year or so to forget? Why is that? Does the Colorado electorate secretly approve of such attitudes?
What other issues should also be off the table, not be addressed by the majority party for fear that Republicans might object, mock, ridicule, or complain?
I, for one, would love to maneuver Republicans into complaining about a law that essentially barred institutionalized racism. Let them charge forth and show their colors.
And, now that the issue has indeed been raised, has been filed as a bill, I for one would be ashamed to be urging that we give it an institutional shuusssh! Such mascots are a shameful reminder of the past, are essentially unimportant except to the people whom they treat as “other” citizens (let’s not pretend otherwise). Such a bill should pass by acclamation after 5 minutes spent reading the text! Yet here is this blog going on and on and on about how dangerous such a bill is to the Democrats! To the contrary; the complaints herein are the embarassment.
(OK, I guess this wasn’t a query after all!)
So, Colorado Pols believes this would be a good bill to pass, if it weren’t for (an apparently temporary) political liability. Fine. As a respected voice in Colorado, doesn’t Colorado Pols have the ability (and creativity) to think outside the box? Instead of sabotaging the current legislative effort by calling the bill “toxic”, why not invite or explore means to accomplish the goals of the bill, by other means?
When we rely upon government to enforce solutions, we do not directly accomplish the goal of educating people on issues of arrogance and racism. The best way to advance this idea (in my view) is to educate members of the respective communities, such that they begin to consider the benefits of solving the problems themselves. Sure, there will be resistance. But if it is worthwhile, why are we not considering (for example) that today’s middle school students will be tomorrow’s decision makers in their respective communities?
If Colorado Pols doesn’t know who to reach out to in order to explore supporting and advancing possible educational opportunities, i’m sure even i could provide some contacts. In my experience, teachers frequently appreciate the offer of guest speakers on interesting and challenging topics in their classrooms. Promoting such ideas in place of firing torpedoes at pending legislation would seem far more constructive, IMHO.
Reducing the Constitution of the United States to a talking point called “political correctness” is one of the many successes of the Republicans due to their control of the public airwaves.
I think the publicity would be good for Colorado; Especially if the conservatives/republicans win big in 2010, as expected. Colorado could brand itself as the state where local school boards don’t need no”political correctness crap” to take care of their red skinned brothers. They handled them before and they will again. That goes double for the Aunt Jamima volley ball teams.
Colorado has a long tradition of home rule and local control. Some of that has constitutional stature. The fights are often very high profile and heart felt, but also entirely symbolic.
There are also lots of mascots out there. Typically there is not one per district, but one per school locations (and sometimes a couple in one location). And, if people locally disagree with the state, it is relatively hard to prevent informal mascots from arising without a formal board approval despite state or school board concerns. You may as well decree that all residents of Colorado root for the Pittsburg Steelers. The actual power elected officials have over these decisions is tenuous if they act contrary to some process they put in place to select a mascot.
When the state stays out of it, the symbolic choices reflect only on the often obscure locality. When the state gets involved, it puts in improptur of approval on sometimes controversial choices.
If one is going to establish standards, one might be well advised to do so with a light hand, perhaps with non-binding guidance to local governments from a state board setting out the concerns involved, rather than with up or down review at the state level.
One could even establish a right to a public hearing at the local level to air concerns about a potential mascot before a decision is made (similar to NEPA in the environmental sphere) with a right to go to court if it isn’t held, without actually setting a binding standard.
I wonder if such a process (if one exists somewhere) has ever resulted in a mascot parodying Native Americans? And, if so, whether the result occurred in the past 60 years?! My trick-knee tells me to doubt it.
From the episode “Day of the Dot” in the Adventures of Pete and Pete.
http://pnp.norecess.org/episod…
Adherence to local control in Denver meant that the only way African-American parents could guarantee that their children would not receive a segregated education, was to file suit in federal court. It was a successful challenge to local control. DPS was under federal court order for almost 20 years, ending in 1995.
School boards are using their police power to enforce racist stereotypes as school mascots, creating an environment which is not only hostile to Indian kids but incredibly unhealthy for all kids.
Thank you Harry Truman for integrating the military in 1948, an election year, and running on that decision and winning. ….even tho the democratic party was split by the Dixicrats (Segregation NOW, Segregation FOREVER..Strom Thurmond) And the Republicans were so convinced that they would ride the racist horse to victory that headlines were printed showing Dewey had won. I am old enough to remember that election and how on Wednesday morning, they were still counting votes. How the hell did that little man from KC/MO get those kind of guts? A little man educated in MO’s segregated schools???? God Bless Harry Truman.
And god damm the people of mass who decided to teach the president of the United States a lesson that police will do what they damm well please and if they want to arrest a black man in his own home, they damm well will….and no beer can buy them off…
I have yet to see any indication that state government is any more committed to racial equity and an end to discrimination in Colorado than Denver’s government.
Why should one presume that the Denver school board is more inclined to discriminatory policy than the Colorado State School Board or another statewide body?
There is also no indication that Colorado’s policy of granting local governments strong home rule powers and local school boards considerable control has anything whatsoever to do with racial politics.
More often than not the school board’s involvement, if any, is to ratify decisions made by students and alumni at the the local level. The case of South High School, one of Denver’s most ethnically controversial mascots wasn’t dispatched until 2009, long after the DPS desegregation order was lifted, despite the efforts of a black principal at the school in 1980 while the desegregation order was in force:
“When Denver Public School named it’s four cardinal direction high schools (East, West, North and South) each took a mascot and imagery associated with that direction. For example West High School took the ‘cowboy’ as it’s mascot.
South High School took imagery from the civil war specifically the South. This included taking the Johnny Reb head as it’s mascot, and using the Confederate Flag to a lesser extent. The imagery was incorporated into the name of the yearbook, “The Johnny Reb,” (changing it from “The Tower Book”) and school newspaper, “The Confederate.”
The images and mascot began to cause controversy in the late 1970s. By 1980 South’s first African American principal, Harold Scott, suggested that the mascot be changed to the ‘Penguins.’ He did not anticipate the attachment the student body had to the name “Rebel” nor the furor that ensued and the suggestion was dropped.
Gradually, due to his wake up call and the growing change in public attitudes the use of the Confederate Flag would fall from use. The school’s yearbook and newspaper became known as the Gargoyle. Even the Johnny Reb Head would be seen less and less.
During the 2007-2008 school year the student body began discussing changing the mascot. They eventually decided on a gargoyle with the school’s famous clock tower in the background. On Thursday, February 19, 2009 the students made a presentation to the Denver Public School board asking for the change, which was granted.
Though in a compromise with school Alumni the name “Rebel,” was kept.”
South High School’s mascot was not Johnny Reb for decades because the DPS School Board wanted to use its police power to create an environment unhealthy to kids.
But, there are some glaring facts which you either don’t see or don’t acknowledge. It was the Denver Board of Education which originally ok’d the Rebel/Confederate motiff….and it was the Denver Board of Education which pursued policies that segregated the school system. That is why it was the Denver Board of Education which was sued in federal court.
It is the facts which were presented in the Keyes case which show that Denver BOE had practices which were discriminatory.
The Denver BOE showed extreme indifference to the impact of the Johnny Reb. I don’t even know if black kids were allowed to go to South when the highschools were first established. I think that is why Manual was established. I think that South is now the most racially and ethnically diverse high school in DPS….a situation which would not have happened, absent the court order.
My impression of Judge Kane, who oversaw the court order, was that he did not interfere in the operations of the school system except what was specifically mandated by the court order.
as of the 1970s, was a policy that students would attend their neighborhood school. It was also the policy of almost every school district in the state at the time. The concept of “school choice” had not yet been developed and widely adopted.
This caused segregation in the schools as a result of residential segregation that far pre-dated the 1970s and only began to meaningfully decline in the state after the desegregation order had been lifted. The remedy in the desegregation order was mandatory busing to integrate schools.
There was a good reason for the desegregation order in Denver and in almost every other major city in the country with residential segregation and multiple schools. But, the basis for that order was not that Denver’s policies were particularly pernicious on their face or in intent. Indeed, the same policy remains the default policy in DPS today.
Denver was singled out for desegregation litigation in Colorado mostly because it was one of the few cities in the state where it was possible to have segregated schools in the sense that people understood it at the time. From the 1970s to 1995, about half of the African-American population of Colorado lived within a few miles of MLK and Colorado Boulevard in Denver and old town Aurora (due of course to historic discrimination in the real estate market). In almost every other school district there weren’t enough African-American students (the notion of a multiethnic society with Hispanic, Asian and other categories wasn’t well established in the early desegregation era), to be anything other than integrated with white students in local schools.
If I recall correctly, the de segregation order was lift in 1995 mostly on the theory that it had become futile. Parents of about 30% of the kids in Denver, disproportionately white, chose to education their children outside of DPS.
Incidentally, state mandated school choice in DPS actually has the effect of increasing school segregation in the city. Both white and black students whose home school is not majority same race tend to choice into a small number of schools where the students of the same race are in the majority.
There was some de jure segregation in city parks around the turn of the century (+/- 1900), but that was long gone by the time that the desegregation order was adopted. I am not aware that Colorado has ever had de jure racial segregation in its schools but stand willing to be corrected.
Denver certainly has a history of racial discrimination. Mayor Stapleton was the KKK endorsed candidate. There were a considerable number of lynchings in the state. But, that coincided closely with a period when KKK candidates held many state government offices; state government was no better.
Also, the fact that DPS approved a change in mascot does not, by itself necessarily imply that DPS approved it in the first place. It may have, but it could also have been a matter that the board viewed as an administrative or student matter that did not call for board action at the time.
These statements suggest that the school assignment boundaries were innocent and only reflected segregation caused by restrictive housing policies. I disagree. You also leave out who brought the suit against DPS. Keyes’ daughter was refused admission to a school in her neighborhood and was instead assigned to a school, further away, with a black student majority.
Denver was not “singled out” for litigation, Denver was the home school district of the Keyes’ child. The court found that that school assignment was discriminatory. My recall was that the intent of the court order was to get rid of segregation, “root and branch.” And, the order was lifted because the Judge ruled that DPS had done everything necessary to create a “unitary system.”
Finally,
I find this statement very interesting. I believe it may be true of white students. I didn’t know it was true of minority students. Can you site a source?
I appreciate a discussion based on facts. I thank you. I did not get out my copy of the Keyes decision, but I will if you think it necessary.
did on school choice a year or two ago. I blogged it at the time and could probably find it.
change the mascot.
After all, what would the majority do if West High decided to rename themselves the West Rednecks and put the mascot as Joe The Plummer or Glen Beck,or Limbaugh?
It’s not far off from Redskins…just change skins for necks.
My understanding is that it comes from a time when soldiers in the West got a bounty for bringing in a dead Indian or evidence of one, such as a “redskin.”
That doesn’t stop the NFL DC football team from using it.
There is a distinct lack of regret for the genocide practiced in the USA against Native Americans.
From genocide to the Washington Redskins, Cleveland Indians, or Atlanta Braves.
A bit of an overreach, I’d say.
About like accusing the Colorado baseball franchise of insulting goombahs from Philly.
Lets have West change their name to the West Rednecks. See how faast the anglo population screams racial slurs.
It’s a form of bigotry. It’s plain and simple to people that understand prejudice.