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 22, 2010 08:33 PM UTC
61 Comments
Legislated cultural sensitivity is always iffy, at best. A non-binding resolution suggesting that school disticts review their mascots would be plenty. And pursuing this now, right out of the gate, in the midst of an economic crisis, while facing another batch of fiscally and economically destructive ballot initiatives, is woefully ill-considered. We need to maintain the focus we had last legislative session, on the economy (including the new energy economy), on delivering quality education, on transportation, on public health and safety, and on creating opportunities for all Coloradans.
Andrews blew it for the Republicans, and Williams could blow it for the Democrats.
At least she’s not the speaker or Senate President.
The Dems desperately need to improve their messaging to counter the conservative media, and now, the expected flood of corporate campaign ads.
e.g.,
Health care: eliminates pre-existing conditions and lifetime limits.
Budget: Close special interest loopholes.
but, this could be a veru divisive issue at the Capitol. Could turn very ugly really quick.
but highly insulting that the state which started the Plains Indian Wars (i.e. Colo. Territorial Militia at the Sand Creek massacre) allows schools to retain “Redskins” and “Savages” as mascots.
And this does not belong in the same category as the GOP’s ridiculous agendas against social services, women, gays and unions which stall the legislature every year.
You go Suzanne!
Whether you agree or disagree with the bill, this is absolutely NOT the time to run it in the legislature. It’s not about policy – it’s about making smart political decisions. Williams can run this bill, but Democrats have to be smarter about it; this is a bill that should be introduced in mid-session in an off election year.
Remember the whole tanning bed thing? With everything else that was going on it looked really ridiculous.
Respect for Native Americans and their heritage is far from ridiculous but there are so many things we really need to do right now just to maintain basic infrastructure, jobs, education and bare minimum services and we need to take care of first things first. Let’s not dive, once again, into every anti-liberal cliche head first.
but there is room for considering what governments should legislate, and what they should not. Republicans have a point when they argue that government mandate is not the only way, and not always the most effective or appropriate way, to pursue a legitimate social end. Furthermore, not all levels of government are appropriate for all levels of policy. If there are people who are offended by a school district’s choice of school symbols, then the state can offer its “good offices” to bring the parties to the table and come to a mutually amicable resolution (which I’m betting most districts would become very eager to do at that point). The lightest effective touch is generally the best.
They are what they mascot.
in a few minutes when you’ve more or less agreed with me. That really worries me.
On this one, though, my point isn’t “let the school boards decide.” My point is: address and resolve the issue with a lighter touch.
The issues you discuss are something that at least some people care about. This isn’t one of those kinds of issues. Further, this should be left up to individual school districts to decide. It’s a disaster all the way around. I could make the commercials myself. And now with corporate funding, someone will.
with Penry’s drop-the-front-license-plates idea.
Williams wants schools to spend money rebranding and she’s offending the politically incorrect. Not smart politics.
I do, btw, would like to see more politically correct mascots. I just don’t think it’s the state’s business.
The mascots are offensive. Trying to get rid of them is not offensive, it’s just a bad political calculation.
Let each district work it out on their own.
But David, you don’t find caricatures like Suzanne Williams is talking about here offensive? I see absolutely no difference between the big-nosed, dark red Indian logos some teams have, and if they were Minstrel Show blackface characters with names like the Arapahoe High Blackskins instead.
But I don’t think every offensive act requires state action, nor do I think a state law will do squat to address the fact that people find the present mascot acceptable.
While I know and respect Senator Williams, let’s get our priorities in order. This is akin to the time taken up last year by Joyce Foster introducing a resolution in support of Israel in the Israeli-West bank confrontation.
Senator Williams to earth – the state is broke, lets deal with bigger issues.
My Pennsylvania high school’s mascot was a warrior in full battle dress. Nothing wrong with that, and I will always be a Warrior alumnus. I could see the term “redskins” being derogatory to some, but it doesn’t rise to the level of needing a state law micro-managing cultural issues best left on the local level.
This is a caucus issue in general. Democratic leadership in the Capitol would be wise to control this sort of thing. Again, they don’t have to say “no,” to Williams’ bill, just “not right now.”
this identical mindset with the white evangelicals of Birmingham Alabama?
His letter from the Birmingham Jail detailed his opposition to entrenched racism and the “not now” argument.
Whether you believe or disbelieve that racism should be tolerated while economic issues are dominant, you owe it to yourself to read his reply. It is opposition writing at its best.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A…
http://www.africa.upenn.edu/Ar…
For years now I have heard the word “Wait!” It rings in the ear of every Negro with piercing familiarity. This “Wait” has almost always meant “Never.”
I should have attributed it better.
It’s not like this is a brand new idea or anything.
If everything on that continuum were equal, then we would have no excuse not to legislate against every single perceived expression of human prejudice. Among the difficulties involved are the micromanagement of human behavior, and the very real disputes over what does and does not constitute prejudice and discrimination.
You have to admit, government-sponsored expressions are in a different category when it comes to legislating about them. That said, I agree this is a needless distraction for the legislature in January 2009 and a political goof.
…on the number of bills legislators can introduce. No dumb bills allowed, applied retroactively!
So then who would determine which bills are “dumb” and which ones are “ok” ?
Pols is right, the caucus should keep things like this in check.
Ok, fine, you twisted my arm. I’ll do it.
The sacrifices I make for others always irritates me.
Sometime next week, I plan to write about dumb bills. In my article, the determination will be made by me and me alone.
The Williams bill will be on my list.
Colorado faces extraordinary problems right now. My ranking of “dumb” will have a lot to do with whether those problems are being addressed.
Add Rep. Ferrandino’s phone book bill to the list of dumb bills. Not everyone has an iPhone.
Tom Russell
Nice safe pick – no? Except the high school students then decided that to show school spirit, they would wear shirts that had owls on them. They all purchased them from Hooters.
Needless to say, the school administration and a bunch of old biddies in the area freaked out.
The girls sports teams were apparently the instigators.
…high school girls are clearly the best judges of what constitutes sexism. So, if they thought the behavior was ok, it must be!
Two recently out of High School and one a senior – I think they show very good judgement. Their view of things will differ with our generations view of things.
to the Reader’s Digest yet?
I don’t think we can have much of a discussion.
won’t make it out of committee. Then it will, hopefully, be forgotten quickly.
One thing I learned is there is never the good/right time to run legislation that makes some people uncomfortable.
The excuses of “it’s too politically charged”, when I wanted to have an amendment or bill address prisoner security for transgender people; i.e. nobody will ever carry it regardless of how many assaults, rapes and deaths occur.
“This is an election year, that is too hot for this year – next year for sure” Great delaying tactic for anything; maybe including cleaning up mascots and providing realistic and dignified role models.
“We can’t run it this year because we want to include it in a bill next year” yeah right, the bill that is always next year.
“We would like to run it this year, except we have this other bill” damned near anything related to insurance industry or prison industry dictates.
“You can carry it if you find a cosponsor” chuckles.
needs to be considered on its own merits, and in the totality of the context. We should be committed to addressing all of the bigotries that still plague our society, but not in all ways at all times without combined consideration of where it falls on the spectrum of inhumanities and how it affects our ability to address other issues that also demand our attention. We should not forfeit our passionate commitment to doing what’s right to the exigencies of pragmatism, but neither should we forfeit a focused commitment to being effective in our efforts to the in the fires of our passion. There is a balance to be struck, lest we either lose our soul or lose our power to give it expression in public policy.
State democrats will heed the recent Mass. victory, but the national democrats will continue with their heads in the sand. What the voters say really isn’t important to democrats.
Remember Pelosi’s comment: you are ‘un-American’ if you don’t agree with her when the TownHall meetings were heating up.
It’s going to be a bad year for the democrats when the economy gets worse.
“What the voters say really isn’t important to democrats”? What on earth does that mean?
First, the voters put Democrats in the White House, majorities in both houses of congress, the governor’s office in Colorado, and majorities in both houses of the Colorado General Assembly.
Second, there is no monolithic thing called “the voters” who all agree with whatever position the person making the claim happens to hold. Polls show that the majority of Americans want the changes that they voted for, but are divided by how much and what form they should take. More voters in Massachusetts were upset by the Democrats not going far enough than going too far, and many people nationwide are upset for that reason as well.
Third, lots of people, from both parties, think that it’s not a positive contribution to civil public discourse to behave the way so many on the Far Right behaved in those Town Hall meetings last summer.
Fourth, the economy is doing better than all analytically based projections predicted a year ago. You may well be right that the condition of the economy will contribute to Democratic losses in 2010, but it will happen as a tribute to voter irrationality, not due to just deserts.
Fifth, we’d all be better off talking about how to meet the challenges and solve the problems that face us as a state and a nation, rather than pursuing any and all cheap tactics to advance a shallow and policy-devoid partisan agenda.
Try being a part of the solution rather than a part of the problem, whether you do so as a Republican, Democrat, or Independent. The first step is to ask what those challenges are, what options exist for dealing with them, what are the pros and cons for each option, and, in general, what does reason applied to information suggest to us? I, for one, will embrace any and all people, of all ideological stripes and all political parties, who are willing to take these simple and obvious steps toward being productive participants in our democracy.
Back in the day, not only were we totally integrated (1948 forward) but, our highschool mascots were all animals…”Fight on Nuremberg Eagles.” We American kids played football in Soldier’s Field, Hitler’s old stamping grounds. We knew god damm well who we were and what we stood for and what our responsibilities were as the sons and daughters of men who won WWII. We fought the Munich Mustages and the Heidelberg Lions and were the better for it. That was over fifty years ago.
MY GOD. You SOBs ought to be ashamed.
Some of those mascots are atrocious and insulting. What kind of school environment are my taxes paying for? I say Way to go, Suzanne Williams!! Way to go, Lady! If the dems cannot stand up for a sense of decency, then the hell with you all.
What goes with the gd Denver Post. First, on Friday, it headlines, above the fold, this bill. THEN, Saturday, on its editorical page (“Colorado has never elected a woman statewide editorial board”) the Post has the nerve to say that this issue is so important that the Post found it necessary to headline it. WTF
I say stand up for the kids. Tell them they are Americans and they should be proud of their heritage and Americans don’t make fun of each other because of their race, creed, ethnic background.
My thanks to the gods, whomever they may be, they gave this country Harry Truman and LBJ.
I just don’t think it calls for a state law. In addition, I think people in the district will learn a lot more if it’s handled by people going to the local school board where it will be discussed.
Not every issue like this is the equivalent of the legalized racism we had in this country. And not every problem should be addressed with a state law.
And finally look at what happened in the South – a lot of the change was due to political action within the South. To stick, it had to (eventually) come from within.
What change came from within the South???? What political action came from the South? It was Black, brave kids, challenging the Jim Crow laws. They succeeded because of federal law enforcement…and federal legislation…and federal supreme court cases. You cannot rewrite history. Many people were killed. You are entitled to your own opinion, but not your own facts.
Silent in this argument have been the Indian people. I would like to know where they stand. Evidently, Suzanne Williams is part Cherokee and so she has the right to speak and act on this.
I keep forgetting that Denver is the norther most southern city. The school district segregated African-American and Hispanic kids from the very beginning. It took a civil rights suit and a federal desegregation order…in effect for almost 20 years to get the school system to be equtiable.
The order was only lifted in 1995.
I remember the screaming and the yelling which went on when a small group of faculty and students tried to change DPS South High School’s “Johnny Reb” mascot. That was just a few years ago; they finally were successful changing the confederate influence.
Yes the feds were involved. But a lot of it was bringing pressure to bear through the demonstrations directly on the local governments. The Montgomery bus strike was resolved locally, not due to federal action.
LBJ as president pushed back against using federal troops because that is what was tried with reconstruction – and it didn’t work out. It was a critical piece that many of the business leaders and the “moderates” in the South, under all that pressure, chose to change the laws and practices.
To get back to the mascot issue – if it’s imposed from without then most people in the district will view it as the heavy hand of government, not that the logo was racist. But when it comes from within, like the Johnny Reb example you give, then it makes the people in the district face up to why it needs to change.
I agree this should be addressed. I just think it’s better to address it within each district.
Your statement is not complete.
The Montgomery bus boycott was settled locally. The sit-ins at Woolworth’s were ultimately successful in integrating the chain. But the rest of the civil rights movement was successful because of the intervention of the federal government.
1) Eisenhower sent the 101st Airborne to desegregate Central High School in Little Rock Arkansas in 1957. There were federal troops for that whole school year.
2) Federal marshalls and Robert Kennedy’s justice department lawyers were sent to the University of Alabama when Governor Wallace stood in the door of the University, and he stepped aside and the University was integrated.
3) Kennedy’s Justice Department lawyers, including the late, great Joe Dolan of Denver (R.I.P.) were under siege at the University of Mississippi when they were there to guarantee the right of an African-American to register. President Kennedy federalized the national guard in Tennessee (or Kentucky, I am not sure) and sent them in to rescue the federal agents, secure the university and allow the registration to go forward.
4) The freedom riders who traveled through the south to show that buses and bus station in interstate commerce had to be integrated were attacked and arrested in Southern towns and the feds came to the rescue.
5) The Civil Rights Act and the Right to Vote Act passed in 1964 & 65 were federal legislation, not local. They were enforced by the power of the federal government.
6) The miscegenation laws all over the South were not outlawed until a Supreme Court decision in 1967.
7) It was court orders which desegregated schools, including Denver, not that the “moderates” in the South decided to change. Can you name one law which was changed in the 1950s and the 1960s in the South by the local “Moderates?”
Did the Southern whites resent the imposition of civil rights and the destruction of JIm Crow and “separate but equal?” You bet they did. The old south went Republican.
To this date, “states rights” is code for don’t let the federals tell us how to treat “our colored.” However, the law is the law and it should apply equally to all citizens. And it does, now.
Racist mascots have no place in this state’s schools. And local school boards are the GOVERNMENT and they should not have the right to enforce racist symbols in public schools, using their police power, which is what is happening now.
Again, the local school boards are government. If the localities feel that this is being imposed by the state government, so what? Let them feel that. The important issue is that the local GOVERNMENTS have not gotten rid of racist symbols. Something has to be done.
It is my humble opinion that “states rights” is code for “let us white people of the South decide how handle our colored.” That was true in the fifties and may not be true, today.
BUT, we will be hearing a lot about “activist justices” as the state wide “Just vote NO on retention” gathers momentum.
Mike Rosen wrote in one of his columns that the first example of “judicial activism” was Brown v.Board of Education of Topeka. He argued that local school boards should decide whether or not schools were integrated, not the federal Supreme Court.
Do you agree, David?
But much of it was a matter of degree. And in some cases it was a combination of federal assistance but not a federal mandate. A lot also was just the feds enforcing existing law.
To give one example:
The feds had people down there, but it was actually the state police that saved the lives of John Lewis and others. And they were doing it to enforce existing state law.
I do agree with you 100% that “states rights” has been a code word for legalized racism. I do agree that federal pressure was essential to the transformation of the South.
But I also think transformation from within is also essential. And while it is more difficult and takes longer, having successful pressure come from within is a lot more effective.
I need to revisit the history of the freedom riders, you may well be right. But, that is not how I remember it.
However, David, to quote an old military saying, “When you have them by the balls, their hearts and minds will follow.”
We may be talking about the same thing. It was necessary for John Lewis, son of the South, to become engaged. However, that was not sufficient without the support of the federal courts and government. If you can’t vote, if you can be killed for “exerting pressure,” then there is no way to make change from within. That is how people are killed. That is why most revolutions fail. That is why successful violent revolutions use terror tactics. That is why the rule of law in the United States is so absolutely vital to our survival. The federal government did not bring “pressure” as much as it brought the law, and troops, when necessary.
All the Democratic legislators holding a press conference, standing on the Capital steps, saying something along these lines:
We support Suzanne Williams and we believe that this is a good bill. American kids know what is fair and what is not fair. American kids know that mascots that may make fun of somebody’s race are not fair. We are here to help correct something which is not fair. We invite our Republican friends to join us. We ask everyone to tell us what they think is the best way to make sure that all our kids are in school environments which show respect, every day, for everyone, regardless of their race, or religion, or gender.
Instead, we get another pile on pile on. Speaking of which, did anyone catch how the Dems quickly shut down rumors that they might try to delay seating Brown in order to pay legislation? Yet, when the Denver School Board did exactly that and signed a contract, out of the public eye, to boot, everyone thought that was just peachy keen. And the woman who sought her rightful seat, six hours before the absolute deadline, was vilified. Another pile on, pile on, because a woman, a minority at that, acted responsibly.
Look at the substance of Williams’ bill: classic idiotic spending. Essentially creating a commission to vet school mascot names and images.
It’s just dumb.
Some of those mascots are racist. Children in Colorado should not be subjected to something as important to a school as a mascot, which reinforces racial stereotypes.
Now, you may object to the regulatory board. That is legitimate. But, particularly in small towns, it is very hard for citizens to change something like a mascot. It could subject them to all kinds of retaliation. So, I don’t mind that in small towns, people get pissed at state government and are then
“forced” to eliminate racist stereotypes….which I think hurt the non Indian kids, also.
But what is of increasing interest to me is that this is the second time, when the pile on happened with the Denver Post, this “progressive” blog and republican talk radio all in lock step. The targets of the pile one were both elected female officials who are also minority. WTF??
However, I still think it’s kind of a dumb bill to run in an election year.
Attributing political sanity to Scott Renfroe for one comment he made about Sen. Williams’ bill is like calling W. a genius because of his decision to go after the Taliban after 9/11 — doing so completely disregards all the other times he’s decided to legislative morality, including this session when he signed on to co-sponsor Senate Bill 113, which would give the death penalty to doctors who perform abortions in any circumstance other than to save the life of a woman.
That’s right, the Statesmen. Our band uniforms had a top hat, white gloves, and cane on the back. Surprisingly, if memory serves, our sports teams weren’t that bad. But really…Statesmen?
I can only imagine what kind of racist freak show mascot they used to have.