House Bill to Save the Sioux Passes 65 to 28.

[kvinbe]

It's a classic case of biting off your nose to spite your face. Let it be known that I very much support the Sioux name on merit alone. However, this is no longer about merit regarding the name alone. This is now about something so much different than that. This has now become about politics, pure and simple. It's a political battle that has already been lost at the national level, and now the only people that stand to be harmed are North Dakota citizens and student athletes. Let it go!!! Though not warranted, we are now moving dangerously close to being viewed in the same light as those who stubbornly and irrationally held on to the belief that the rebel flag should be retained in Southern culture, universities, and states. Before, we had just lost the battle because we had retained our digniity and our athletic programs would continue to thrive and beat the pulp out of the programs of PC institutions. But now, by forcing the issue still further, we're about to lose the war. Ultimately, it's about conducting ourselves in a classy manner as North Dakotans. Unfortunately, any sense of class and dignity that is associated with the great state of North Dakota is about to go right down the gutter because of a relentless, irrational zeal that has lost all perspecitve.

I'm a North Dakotan. I'm proud to be a North Dakotan. It's time to show some class and dignity as North Dakotans.

Let's take out our frustrations on the playing field. That's where we'll get the last word...not in the legislature and a protracted political battle.

[ksixpack]

It's Eliot... not Elliot. Only one (L) in first name.

Eliot = Idiot. Only one (D)...

[Goon]

As long as you agree with his worldview. Otherwise, he is quick to label nonbelievers, quick to attack, quick to inflame, quick to demean. As one of the earliest agents against the name, back in the 1970's, Mr. Glassheim is dedicated to this particular crusade. He is a genuinely nice man. But his political worldview is quite polarizing. With Mr. Glassheim, he too often is consumed by his own political beliefs and this causes him to intensely dislike those who do not agree with his views. That makes him human, fair enough. But on this particular issue, he has been filling and expelling his wind-bag-lungs for decades. No doubt he will do so long after the matter is resolved. But please, don't suddenly take stock in his standard anti-name stump speech recycled most recently on Monday in Bismarck. Please, don't present him as some clear headed, enlightened, even-handed, unbiased paragon of reason. He is a veteran of bitter partisan politics, sometimes as a passenger -- but more often as the driving force behind divisive, destructive, insulting, and unpleasant dialog. I suggest the anti-name crowd try to find a few new champions.

And as a side note, your inclusion of Mr. Glassheim's religion is EXACTLY the sort of baseless accusations which are so very unecessary. Not a single soul on this board has ever raised that fact, nor hinted at that fact, nor mentioned that fact, insinuated that fact. Its highly likely that most people do not know Mr. Glassheim is jewish, since he himself - to his credit - has NEVER used his faith as an excuse, or as a defense, or as a weapon to attack. I suspect he would be deeply disappointed that somebody who calls himself a friend would resort to such churlish reparte.

I know what you're saying here, since I have been in Grand Forks, ND he has been a very divisive person in this community if you're on the other side of his argument.

[Oxbow6]

Who cares if Kelly or Eliot didn't attend UND. A lot of good that degree did you. Their are many other great colleges and universities in this country outside of your narrow spectrum.

Who cares if a person is Jewish or Catholic for that matter. Or his/her political preference or gender or ethnicity or race. You always seem to want to inject some divisive bent to any post or "conversation" you have on this board, especially when it come to the Sioux nickname/logo. Why is that? Is it because maybe you're so narrow minded and fixed on your own ideology and mindset?

And as far as the good a college degree does someone...it's "there" not "their".

You might be better off dropping some of your stones.

[rsioux]

Since you have nothing of substance or value to bring to this conversation or agrument, you can have Jeanotte and the rest of his/your ilk help you off your glass tower.

Amen, if it's so bad here, there are other places to live, amazing how UND continues to succeed, take your 1% with you and start your own institution and see how well you do.

[GeauxSioux]

Nickname Issue May Head Back To Higher Ed Board

The house has approved a bill that seeks to keep the name. While it allows the state to sue the NCAA, Stenejhem that's already been done and he's not so sure he can sue the association again

Attorney General Wayne Stenehjem says the North Dakota Board of Higher Education would again have to decide how to handle the Fighting Sioux nickname and logo issue should the legislature pass the bill and its signed by the governor.

Back to the SBoHE?

[xI Hammer Ix]

Back to the SBoHE?

Wow, if that's the case this will have been a waste of everyone's time.

[Chewey]

Nickname Issue May Head Back To Higher Ed Board

Back to the SBoHE?

A spokesman for Gov. Dalrymple says he hasn't decided whether he'd sign the bill if it passes the senate. So what's up with this Governor? It's hard to imagine him not signing such a law that has such support, especially with a re-election bid coming up in a couple of years. I know he ran against Dorgan for Senate in 1992 and lost but that's about all I know of him. What his story? Is he committed to his constituents or is he all wobbly?

[darell1976]

A spokesman for Gov. Dalrymple says he hasn't decided whether he'd sign the bill if it passes the senate. So what's up with this Governor? It's hard to imagine him not signing such a law that has such support, especially with a re-election bid coming up in a couple of years. I know he ran against Dorgan for Senate in 1992 and lost but that's about all I know of him. What his story? Is he committed to his constituents or is he all wobbly?

So he veto's it then what its all over??

[The Sicatoka]

So he veto's it then what its all over??

{sigh}

I'm amazed at how many don't know how something becomes law (called the Century Code in ND).

In an effort to try to fix the apparent short-comings of either the schools or the learners here's an educational video about how a "bill" becomes law. (The transcript of the video is here.) Be aware however that this is written for US laws, not specifically ND, but the process is the same. ...

It would take a veto override vote (requires 2/3 majority) in both chambers of the Legislature to undo a Governor's veto.

[GeauxSioux]

{sigh}

It would take a veto override vote (requires 2/3 majority) in both chambers of the Legislature to undo a Governor's veto.

We watched "I'm just a bill sitting on Capital Hill" a couple of weeks ago. My kids could probably answer this.

[Goon]

A spokesman for Gov. Dalrymple says he hasn't decided whether he'd sign the bill if it passes the senate. So what's up with this Governor? It's hard to imagine him not signing such a law that has such support, especially with a re-election bid coming up in a couple of years. I know he ran against Dorgan for Senate in 1992 and lost but that's about all I know of him. What his story? Is he committed to his constituents or is he all wobbly?

Time to vote that Governor out of office.

[Siouxbooster#33]

So he veto's it then what its all over??

I believe the majority is veto-proof -- if it passes in the sentate by the same margins.

And since the legislature is in session, I do not believe that this law would require his signature. (the legislative gurus could probably spell that out better than I).

I think the Gov is in a wierd position, because he comes from the political wing of his party that has been almost totally silent as to the name. Hoeven was almost 100% silent on the matter. The AG was always a reluctant warrior. Dalrymple, to the best of my knowledge, has been as silent as Hoeven. The Governor's silence at THIS point is a little irritating. LEAD, darn it. Stand up and say Yes or No. Take a stand. Don't sit in your office and wring your hands and make bland comments about "not being sure whether you will sign the bill -- if passed -- or not." Leadership would be as follows: "If this bill passes, I will sign it." This tells the sentate that the govenor's office will not embarass them, and it is OK to move ahead and vote for the law. OR, say, "I will not sign this bill, because . . . . " This tells the Sentate that perhaps their reservations, if any, are real. It gives those who oppose the bill an additional serious voice, and it would clear the minds of potential fence sitters.

Taking a stand by the Gov would also let the people know where you stand. Ahhhhhhh . . . . there is the rub, eh? Sitting on his hands and pretending nothing was happening at UND worked for Hoeven, he marched into the Senate without barely breaking a sweat.

[ScottM]

Time to vote that Governor out of office.

Why? Hoeven had a better opportunity to take a stand on the issue a few years ago, and he passed on politicizing it. Dalrymple is in a more difficult position, since it could spark a losing battle that may impinge the state's consitution. Moreover, the fact that the State AG has all but said he cannot (read: will not) revisit the settlement shows what an amazingly idiotic exercise this will be. And I thought legislators in the south had a monopoly on stupidity ...

[MDNSioux]

{sigh}

It would take a veto override vote (requires 2/3 majority) in both chambers of the Legislature to undo a Governor's veto.

65-28 is already more than 2/3 of the house of reps, and if most of the votes go along party lines in the senate like it did in the house, then it will be 2/3 also. I dont know if the gov. vetos the bill if it has to go back and be revoted on though.

Here is a link on how a bill becomes law in ND for anyone who is interested. http://www.legis.nd.gov/docs/pdf/bill-law.pdf

[gjw007]

Great post, it's amazing how many people on this board and in the ND legislature are either blind or willfully ignorant to the North Dakota Constitution. Post after post talking about what the sanctions will mean and whether UND can or cannot host a postseason game. I've got news for everyone, It doesn't matter what the sanctions will mean! The State Supreme Court has already ruled in Spirit Lake v. SBHE that the SBHE has the Constitutional Authority to retire the nickname. The Attorney General has also issued an opinion stating that the North Dakota Constitution “includes a provision that says the State Board of Higher Education shall have full authority over the institutions under its control." He further went on to state "I am committed to the nickname. But I’m even more committed to the Constitution. I just swore an oath to uphold it.” Even if this bill makes it out of the Governor's office, It will never go into effect as it is Unconstitutional on its face. That fact has been already been affirmed by both the State Supreme Court as well as the Attorney General. Only a constitutional amendment stripping the SBHE of its authority would make this law constitutional. The SBHE and UND can and will continue to retire the nickname regardless of whether this bill passes or not, because it's their Constitutional right! The Constitution is a wonderful thing. Y'all should read it.

This is not exactly correct as you are saying that a Supreme Court ruling in final but that is not always the case and previous Supreme Rulings have been overridden over time. A classic example is the ruling in the 1890 that black and whites are equal even when treated separately. In the 1950 with the Brown V. Topeka ruling, the Supreme Court ruled that separate but equal ruling was unconstitutional. The implication that Supreme Court ruling are static is incorrect (think about this, why are so many people wanting judges on the court to overrule Roe V. Wade). The Supreme Court ruling is only final until the next Supreme Court overrules it, which thank God, doesn't happen often. The SBHE is subject to the whim of the budgets presented by the elected officials. If the elected officials want something, they can certainly pressure the SBHE with funding.

I still haven't figured out how this helps UND and the nickname as it appears to be a day late and a dollar short. UND and the state have already agreed to retire the nickname and has done so in a lawsuit. I don't remember the lawsuit being about monopolistic practices (anti-trust) of the NCAA as much as it was the body of the NCAA that made this ruling didn't have the authority (which they precede then to get from the general membership). I would retire the name as per the lawsuit agreement and not take on another nickname. It emphasizes that a forced retirement of the nickname by the PC police can't be replaced and it still gives UND a unique position as the emphasis is the University of North Dakota. It also allows it to remember it past and the pride in the Sioux whereas the NCAA is wishing to have the memories of the Sioux left in the dust heap of history. In addition, it is a subtle reminder that there may be nicknames that the PC police haven't attacked yet but could in the future.

If the bill passes and is signed by the Governor, all it does is antagonize more people who will continue their activities against UND. In the end, all I see it doing is delaying but not eliminating the final outcome. It appears to be a game of blink and I don't think the NCAA is going to blink.

[star2city]

While all of this may be true to a degree, do you think it's any different than most of the other University Presidents? I would like to keep the name, but I'm not sure if the positives outweigh the negatives at this point. Since Kelley is a University President, perhaps he has a pulse on what other University Presidents feel in regards to the Sioux name. For example, perhaps he has spoken with the President of Texas Tech to see how he feels about scheduling the Sioux in anymore athletic competitions. Perhaps the TT President told him it's not worth the negative PR his school received with the TT Raider/Native American caricature poster to schedule us anymore. I'm not pretending to have any inside knowledge on any of this, but I'm guessing Mr. Kelley has more information to work with then the general public. Do I like that we may lose the nickname...absolutely not. But the negative ramifications of keeping it definitely needs to be considered. The questions is, for me I guess, is who is looking out for the best interest of the University (long term)...the ND State Legislature or Mr. Kelley. I'm not sure I can answer that question.

Or perhaps Kelley has already talked with all the Summit League Presidents, but didn't talk with the Summit League Commissioner.

Kelley has already indicted himself in this area when he spoke about fearing for conference affiliation if the nickname wasn't dropped. Then Douple first saying it was a huge issue, but later amending his story to confess that he was lying: the nickname wasn't an issue but a contrived story.

IF the Sioux nickname was ever truly a "big" issue among University Presidents, the Big Sky never would have accepted UND without another nickname already in place.

[The Sicatoka]

65-28 is already more than 2/3 of the house of reps, ...

Yes, but if and when an override vote were to come about, how will the landscape have changed?

There's no guarantee all those votes will still be there.

[star2city]

65-28 is already more than 2/3 of the house of reps, and if most of the votes go along party lines in the senate like it did in the house, then it will be 2/3 also. I dont know if the gov. vetos the bill if it has to go back and be revoted on though.

Here is a link on how a bill becomes law in ND for anyone who is interested. http://www.legis.nd.gov/docs/pdf/bill-law.pdf

The veto can be overridden with 2/3rd vote in both chambers.

House vote:

65 votes for: 62 R, 3 D

28 votes against: 6 R, 22 D

1 absent (1 R)

[star2city]

Yes, but if and when an override vote were to come about, how will the landscape have changed?

There's no guarantee all those votes will still be there.

If there is a veto that is sustained, there will be an initiative brought forth with 12,000+ signatures. Bank on it!

The initiative would win both in ND and on Standing Rock.

With a vote on Standing Rock, the NCAA wouldn't have a leg to stand on.

The people are now in control of this issue - not the politicians, not the academics. The spirit of the people of Spirit Lake will prevail.

[The Sicatoka]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/41723107/ns/local_news-fargo_nd/

Attorney General Wayne Stenejhem says UND would wind up on the NCAA's list of violators if it keeps the nickname. He says in part that would leave the NCAA urging other schools not to play UND in athletics.

Folks, claiming " ... we'll just schedule ... " is just plain naive.

It takes both teams agreeing to make a schedule. And it's far easier to find a "no" excuse than a "yes".

So unless there's a way to guarantee not ending up on the sanctions list, this effort can end up a net negative.

[Cratter]

Time to vote that Governor out of office.

Time for all SIoux fans to fight. Email the governer telling him your support of the Fighting Sioux and how he wasn't even elected Governor and how it would be a travesty for him to override the vote of the people (house and senate)!

[Cratter]

The game happened because UND was taken off the NCAA's list when the lawsuit was settled. Wisconsin and I think Minnesota have policies that say they won't play UND in non conference games for as long as the school is at odds with the NCAA over the nickname.

http://host.madison.com/sports/college/basketball/men/article_015c650a-f296-11df-80f8-001cc4c03286.html

(The original poster said conference.....that was untrue. Which I gladly point out. Many people are spewing lies here.)

I don't believe that's entirely true, because the school had a ban on playing schools with indian nicknames since 1992 before the NCAA even came out with the whole "Hostile and Abusive" tell others what to think referendum.

It appears Wisconsin came up with an "excuse" why they were scheduling UND.

One would have to ask WI if they are changin their policy? And if they do and UND is removed from the NCAA list. All is good again.

This will be THE story when we play any team anymore on our numerous national televised games. "The Fighting Sioux who are so beloved in the state kept the nickname against all odds and gave the NCAA a big middle finger!"

And to top it all off no one can say the name is hostile or abusive. The closest Sioux tribe gave their approval for UND to keep the nickname! (and the other tribe gave their approval years ago which they say is forever).

Realizing, of course, that they may not have any Native American bloodlines, all 4 of the Representatives that represent the Spirit Lake and Standing Rock legislative districts voted FOR the retention of the Fighting Sioux nickname.

[ScottM]

So unless there's a way to guarantee not ending up on the sanctions list, this effort can end up a net negative.

It would have been nice if they had a direct quote from the AG. However, I think the bigger issue would be how to relitigate settled issues, let alone the potential impasse between the Board and any new law that requires them to keep the name/logo. Needless to say, Wayne's mustache will probably grow back a nice gray over this matter.

[darell1976]

It would have been nice if they had a direct quote from the AG. However, I think the bigger issue would be how to relitigate settled issues, let alone the potential impasse between the Board and any new law that requires them to keep the name/logo. Needless to say, Wayne's mustache will probably grow back a nice gray over this matter.

What we need is a direct quote from someone with the NCAA. Myles Brand is dead, I don't even know who is the head of the NCAA anymore. What do they think of all this, and has UND, or the state been in contact with the NCAA, maybe things have changed since Brand's death.