Let your voices be heard in Bismarck-Sioux logo

[gooner]

Hello everyone. This week discussion will be held in Bismarck on new bills to save the UND Fighting Sioux name and logo. For those of us that cannot be there in person I have attached a link provided by Rob Port to get your message of support regarding keeping the name and logo. Please pass this along to as many people as you can so our voices can be heard loud and clear in Bismarck.

Thank you.

http://sayanythingblog.com/entry/take-action-cut-your-taxes-save-the-sioux-nickname-and-promote-government-transparency/?utm_source=Say+Anything+Email+List&utm_campaign=3f5fbe21de-Welcome12_21_2010&utm_medium=email

Todd Seguin

President F/M Sioux Boosters

[dakota fairways]

Has there been any word out of the legislature as to whether the education committee has given a pass or do not pass recommendation to any of the nickname bills?

[ringneck28]

That exact thought was in my mind today, any word?

[Goon]

Has there been any word out of the legislature as to whether the education committee has given a pass or do not pass recommendation to any of the nickname bills?

I am wondering the same thing as well.

[fightingsiouxfan86]

I am wondering the same thing as well.

The legilature is discussing the bills this afternoon and making any necessary revisions. There will then be a house vote on the bills but it doesn't sounds like this has been scheduled yet.

[PhillySioux]

Committee gives blessing to House 1263

[Ray77]

Committee gives blessing to House 1263

So what, exactly, does this mean? What is a 10-5 do-pass recommendation from the House Education Committee? What are the next steps?

[PhillySioux]

So what, exactly, does this mean? What is a 10-5 do-pass recommendation from the House Education Committee? What are the next steps?

The bill goes to the House for a vote, then if passed, on to the Senate. Assuming both houses approve the SAME bill (assuming no amendments), onto Governor. Not a legislature historian, but the full body follows advice of the respective committees most of the time. However, this isn't a pedestrian bill.

[mksioux]

The committee chose the Al Carlson drafted bill, which was not the best of the three IMO. The stuff about initiating anti-trust litigation against the NCAA is a non-starter. The anti-trust lawsuit was already brought and dismissed with prejudice as part of the settlement. It would be a sanctionable offense if the State re-brought that lawsuit. One of the other bills would have been better, but I suppose we're early on in the process and these details can still be ironed-out.

[Chewey]

Committee gives blessing to House 1263

Excellent News!!!!!!!!!!

[The Sicatoka]

So what exactly does the Legislature expect to accomplish with this?

BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF NORTH DAKOTA:

SECTION 1. A new section to chapter 15-10 of the North Dakota Century Code is created

and enacted as follows:

University of North Dakota fighting Sioux nickname and logo.

The intercollegiate athletic teams sponsored by the university of North Dakota shall be known as the university of North Dakota fighting Sioux. Neither the university of North Dakota nor the state board of higher education may take any action to discontinue the use of the fighting Sioux nickname or the fighting Sioux logo in use on January 1, 2011. Any actions taken by the state board of higher education and the university of North Dakota before the effective date of this Act to discontinue the use of the fighting Sioux nickname and logo are preempted by this Act. If the national collegiate athletic association takes any action to penalize the university of North Dakota for using the fighting Sioux nickname or logo, the attorney general shall consider filing a federal antitrust claim against that association.

First, does the Legislature expect the NCAA to back down when it's told the ND State Legislature of ND has made "Fighting Sioux" state law? Seriously? The NCAA is so full of itself that it'll scoff at the folks in Bismark. Book it.

And I'm really confused by the bolded sentence. " ... shall consider ... "? Hey, if you're doing this, it'd better be for more than "shall consider". And mksioux is right: The anti-trust angle was already dismissed with prejudice as part of the settlement.

There is one angle in this that hasn't been tried, and should have been long ago: First Amendment. The NCAA is a "public actor" when it comes to intercollegiate athetlics (as there is no governmental intercollegiate regulating body). Try as it will to claim it is a private organization it is still made up of many, many public entities receiving state and federal funding. How will judges view a conglomeration of public entities trying to stifle free speech?

At this point, I'm not sure whether to laugh or cry ...

[ScottM]

So what exactly does the Legislature expect to accomplish with this?

Getting the board and UND sued for breach of contract (read: the Settlement) and/or having all possible sanctions aimed at UND et al. take effect? Moreover, I believe the original agreement contained standard "release forever" langugage as to claims in the litigation.

Another patently stupid move by a legislature that was very late to the fight.

[Blackburn87]

Still hopeful...

[darell1976]

So no playoffs at either the AC, REA or the Betty....ever. No Gophers, Iowa, or WIsconsin except the WCHA (until they leave), and who knows what other sanctions the NCAA could throw at us. Retire the name. Its over. Whats the point if we go to the WCHA final five in plain ol North Dakota jerseys and not being known as the Fighting Sioux (per NCAA sanctions).

[dakota fairways]

Instead of the legislature passing the bills that have been proposed, which would have some potentially very negative effects on the NCAA-UND relationship, I'd like the legislature to go down another path:

- Place the Sioux name as the perpetual nickname of UND on the ballot, so all ND voters have a say.

- Since Sioux County is essentially the Standing Rock reservation, the votes of Sioux County would be a de facto Standing Rock vote.

- If the vote in both Sioux County and North Dakota affirms the nickname, the AG would be required to petition the NCAA for the reinstatement of the Fighting Sioux name, as all requirements of the NCAA would then have been met. The NCAA would have to fold based on this type of democratic action.

If the legislature doesn't impose a statewide vote, the same measure could be put in place by gaining voters signature for an initiative.

If the principles of our representative democracy are properly used, the tyranny of PC politics can and will be defeated.

I still think this is the best idea that has been proposed. Well thought out and would give UND and the AG some beef in front of the NCAA. Anyone with a legislator's ear should have them get this into the floor discussion of the bill. After reading the testimony that was in the paper, I think the people should be heard and not bleeding heart liberal college professor types (which includes those who sit on the National Collegiate Athletic Association committees). The people of the tribes. If the legislature won't put it to a vote of the people, the people do have the power to put it on the ballot by initiative.

[Chewey]

Getting the board and UND sued for breach of contract (read: the Settlement) and/or having all possible sanctions aimed at UND et al. take effect? Moreover, I believe the original agreement contained standard "release forever" langugage as to claims in the litigation.

Another patently stupid move by a legislature that was very late to the fight.

I have to agree that they are late to the fight, but at least they are doing something. I don't think the anti-trust angle will work but something in the 1st Amendment realm might. I think any final bill will omit the anti-trust language. The big thing here is that a legislative body is taking issue with the NCAA's heavy-handed and discriminatory treatment vis-a-vis UND, the native americans who support the nickname, UND alumni, etc. Public exposure of this nonsense is a benefit and it is something that needs to happen. If a bill is passed and signed into law, then the NCAA will have a choice to make about enforcing its "policy". This would be an extremely precarious path to take where a state and, more importantly probably, both tribes have taken public stances against the policy (presuming a vote on Standing Rock is allowed).

Would the NCAA want a lot of publicity concerning the following facts which serve to impugn its "hostile and abusive" and "discrimination" claims:

1. 70% of one tribe has voted in favor of keeping the nickname;

2. The other Sioux tribe in the state would vote in favor of the nickname if a few tribal council members would allow a vote;

3. Completely ad hoc and unfair and discriminatory treatment concerning all of the universities that have NA nicknames

A. Central Michigan and Florida State have to get permission of the closest namesake tribes whereas UND has to get permission of all namesake tribes;

4. NCAA using its monopoly standing and money to squelch free speech and completely scrap decades of athletic tradition and state tradition;

5. NCAA (translation: A bunch of rich white guys) aligning themselves with a few racist NA tribal council members telling the majority of NA's that they ARE AND WILL BE offended by the "Fighting Sioux" nickname and logo when the vast majority of NA's believe otherwise;

6. Racism and political corruption in action to deny an entire body of people the right to express their views on an issue.

Let's hope that the legislature and the Governor will listen to the vast majority of their constituents and pass something like this. How could they do otherwise knowing the huge support a vast # of their constituents have for this? Thank God for Archie Fool Bear and Steve Fool Bear and Eunice Davidson and a ton of other NA's and alumni and interested parties, including the legislature, for keeping up the fight on this. The longer this goes on, the more the NC$$ is exposed for its corruption, racism and outright chicanery. The longer this goes on, the more likely it will be that people will see how a minority of a minority who is well-positioned can not only deny the rights and wishes of the majority but also arbitrarily scrap decades of tradition. The longer this goes on, the more likely it will be that people will see how a minority of a minority of well-positioned racists can impair the financial interests of a state run institution (i.e. scrapping the nickname and logo and causing financial losses through loss of merchandise sales). John Hoeven, et al should be taking a national stance on this sort of garbage, too, by voicing support of what the legislature is doing. I am no longer a resident of ND but has anyone bothered to call Hoeven's office to tell him to do something?

[Siouxbooster#33]

The settlement is trumped by the change in the law. The settlement is an agreement between parties based on the status of the law at that time. The settlement is not a Supreme Court ruling, it has not binding precedential value.

This is first year law school procedure stuff: The legislature makes the laws, the courts interpret the laws. A settlement is merely a contract between parties approved by a judge. The remedy for failure to follow the settlement is not, instantly, the imposition of previously threatened sanctions. The remedy for failure to abide by a settlement resides with the court, and is a matter to be argued and discussed by the parties. Furthermore, the NCAA is not granted immediate carte blanche to install draconian sanctions until the Court rules, as a matter of law, that the settlement is violated -- and then the court must rule, as a matter of law, that the parties are somehow back "to square one." If the court rules as a matter of law that the settlement was violated by North Dakota, there are many options available -- including payment of a fine (including a nominal fine), or reinstatement of the litigation at the place it was at before the settlement was reached.

Also, North Dakota can argue that its legislature has spoken, and the NCAA does not have the authority to punish schools for following the dictates of the legislature. This new law would create a new issue of anti-trust litigation that did not exist during the previous round of litigation -- and even one argument of anti-trust abuses is dead because it was dismissed with prejudice, this new law would allow the matter to be litigated anew.

Furthermore, throughout the entire litigation process, the court has the authority to bar either side from enacting sanctions until the matter is resolved (as was the case in the first round of litigation).

So in short -- this new law, if passed, would not instantly bless imposition of NCAA sanctions.

The judicial process controls. The will of the legislature controls.

[dlsiouxfan]

I can't believe this idiocy is going to pass. The ND legislators pushing for this must be functionally illiterate. Isn't there an attorney anywhere on this legislative committee who can explain what it means when something is "dismissed with prejudice"? If a lawyer in private practice pulled something like this they would be sued for malpractice and deservedly so.

This is pretty much going along as I feared. UND athletes in sports like BB, FB, etc. will take it in the shorts so the hockey team can wear the Sioux jersey for a few more seasons. It's not right and those athletes deserve better than to be used as fodder for politicians who really could give rats ass about the issue but see it as an opportunity to grandstand.

[BobIwabuchiFan]

I can't believe this idiocy is going to pass. The ND legislators pushing for this must be functionally illiterate. Isn't there an attorney anywhere on this legislative committee who can explain what it means when something is "dismissed with prejudice"? If a lawyer in private practice pulled something like this they would be sued for malpractice and deservedly so.

This is pretty much going along as I feared. UND athletes in sports like BB, FB, etc. will take it in the shorts so the hockey team can wear the Sioux jersey for a few more seasons. It's not right and those athletes deserve better than to be used as fodder for politicians who really could give rats ass about the issue but see it as an opportunity to grandstand.

Why does this always have to be about the BB or FB programs and not about all of UND athletics? The nickname and logo have consequence for all of the programs and it will have a negative effect on all programs if it is finally removed...Try being a fan for all of UND, instead of just your chosen favorite programs...

BobIwabuchiFan

[Knickball2]

When the dust clears, and the money has spoken, I believe the nickname will still be here. Yes, I'm pro-nickname/logo, but this is the position

I've always taken. If the Standing Rock Nation won't allow a vote, the State will, and believe it or not, the Standing Rock members (not all) are

citizens of the State also, so their voices will be heard, along with the entire populus. Good or bad, it's on....

[Cratter]

When the dust clears, and the money has spoken, I believe the nickname will still be here.

You are holding on to a pipe dream.

Still be "here" unofficially.

UND will not be officially known as the Fighting Sioux. The bill will not pass.

[greenwinger_13]

You are holding on to a pipe dream.

Still be "here" unofficially.

UND will not be officially known as the Fighting Sioux. The bill will not pass.

Wow don't be so positive about everything.. jeesh! Those who have given up have truly shown their character.. who cares if its been dragging on, or the state came in late, or the NA's in standing rock didn't vote...etc... If your favorite team gave up a game with a period left would that be ok? If they gave up with 2 minutes left... it wouldn't be ok

[Cratter]

There down 8-1 to BC in the third period. ha

[Teeder11]

There down 8-1 to BC in the third period. ha

So, you're saying there's a chance.

[Cratter]

So, you're saying there's a chance.

For you Lloyd anything is possible.