kansas city chiefs and the washington team game in kansas city in 2005. and it was they are that my eyes saw some very horrific things that i had never seen before. i have experienced racism in the border towns of the navajo nation and this was nothing like that. usually people would in the border towns or in our school system would save these horrible things to you but in private. you know, everyone was kind of hush-hush about it and no one really challenged those things. i remember going into the store when i was little and a woman pushing me. i ran into her and i was running around in the store. i hate her accidentally and she said you asking indians. i told my mom and my dad and they were like luscious go get out of here. so we left the store. it was just kind of hush-hush. so when i went to this game and just by simply standing there and holding a sign that says i am not your god for people are human beings, not mascots, we recall the worst things we are treated in the most disrespectful way. i was very very shocked and i wanted to do some thing. i wanted to shout back but i couldn't. it was a peaceful protest. but we just stood there in the lab to happen around us. it was okay. it was socially acceptable to demean and degrade american people. people walk by and didn't pay any mind to it. they said whatever, just another game. i thought if this is what these games promote what is this big deal about the nfl and sports? they are actually profiting and making tons of money off of stereotyping native people and the violent behavior directed towards us. it was very eye-opening for me to see firsthand. so if after that that i got in touch with suzanne through a mutual friend of ours. i was very young. but i was learning and i wanted to help this issue. i felt like after what i had seen how could i not do anything? so that is how it began. >> that brings us to suzan harjo. you've been at this along time challenging mascots in general. so could you give us a sense in the arc of this controversy where are we right now? is at the beginning of the end, begin to the beginning or right in the middle. where are we? >> well, the very first mascots in sports that was supposed to be about as come up with a red at the university of oklahoma style in 1870. since then, we've collectively eliminated two thirds. we have eliminated more than 2000 of them. [applause] there are just over 900 to go. in the meantime, we created a national museum of the american indian. so as we are getting rid of them, we are able to confine them to the museums into the history books where they belong. pretty soon people will sit back and say that happen? there were really those kinds of things? people were so foolish as to believe in this mascots and hold onto them as if they were holding onto a dear relative and try not to dislodge them from their own persona. we have seen time after time that once these mascots are removed once the names are removed once that owner has persona is retired, you really have a better football team, a better basketball team. you have a more winning game. so my message to the washington football team was eliminated two thirds of these in american sports. most of the ones across the country with the same name as the washington franchise had been eliminated have just chosen to get rid of it them selves. and since the washington football team once a great and powerful franchise has not been to a super bowl since we filed suit in 1992. people in my bank and on capitol hill say you still have that occurs. we say now, it is not a curse. it is just karma. it is their own fault. they are doing it to themselves. if they would just throw off the shackles of the same get rid of it have a name change contest, everything would be wonderful for them and we would start winning again. i just don't think they are going to win until they do that. this is in the 23rd year. that is an amazing coincidence. 23 years and they have never been back to a super bowl. in the meantime, there has been a case that has my name for 17 years now amanda blackhorse has the privilege and burden of dragging around the lawsuit. we are just going to keep her veiling and prevailing and prevailing and more and more people across the country are seeing the area of their parents or grandparents ways saying we don't want that. that is not who we are. more and more native nations are saying we don't want to use false identities, false personas laid on us anymore. we are not going to take it because that is the root of a lot of our problems. people don't take it seriously because we are not taking ourselves seriously. you have people all over the country, native people saying enough is enough. we are not passing this burden onto our children and grandchildren. it is going to end now. so you have this movement that is just grown and grown steadily. where are we? we are right up there at the pinnacle and we are looking around at all of these unfortunate souls down in the valley who are saying, what should we do? what should we do? we are a pure saying we have the answer. [laughter] just stop what you're doing. get some sort of identity. quit ragging on us and pick something that doesn't offend any other living people. how hard is that? that is our message. and we have already won in societal terms. we have already prevailed because we have a lot of people in society -- all kinds of people who understand that this is just wrong. it's just wrong. >> and we know that from some of the polling we have seen for an overwhelming majority of people regarded as offensive or understand why indians might think it is offensive. they would not refer to one of us to our phase by that word. and yet, there is still a majority of people who say the football team should be allowed to keep using it. so what is going on there? >> well people in america are so used to being racist but that kind of have to hold onto it a little bit. people who have been ill for a very long time but they don't understand and when they start feeling ill again, now i'm comfortable again because they are not used to be well. so what we are doing is part of the maturation of america say you can live without racism. you can live without bigotry. you don't have to bargain for little pieces of racism. but a lot of them say is we will give you that. can we call you something -- what else can we call you? you can't call us anything. stop the name-calling. this is all coming about the more we learn about the leading the more we learn about the dynamics, the power dynamics of people in authority who are imposing their ways and their prejudices. the more we learn about all of these things, the more we learn about this kind of subject. so that is where we are. it is a different kind of thing when you are in a majority population that is used to having people to oppress. you have to just sort of weaned off of it. and say this is a societal disease and we are going to help you get well. we are going to help you. we have the answer here. >> if i may just go with that in the history of racism. when you think of the washington football team, they were the last to integrate. so they're great history and tradition, sorry for another picture, but here is the party supported the owner at the time mr. marshall and their sign says keep the redskins way. their level of awareness at the time in 1961. so when america and up as they year the nfl owners wrote a letter in support of this gentleman and they honored him as savior because he was fighting for his rights, yet all of those other teams integrated. the history of the redskins were they were the last to allow black skinned and their team. now we have individuals from african-americans say what is the big deal. i understand and i've been in the week and it's a powerful machine. a lot of guys play now do not want to talk against the league. there is an individual here, richard sherman that has guaranteed money so he doesn't fear the league and he has said the nfl and the history proves it and they continue it with the allowance of the redskins name. they have the bravery to do that but he has guaranteed money. he doesn't fear the machine of the nfl. that's quite a machine. i've been under it before. when you have this great history and tradition, dan snyder, with the nazi party supporting you and keeping black skins out at the time now we have african-american athletes that are prominent and i guarantee you an african-american president because the non-indian fans had pictures of michael jordan on their walls and i was okay to idolize athletes that were a different color because they were us part of sports. it's an interesting dynamic how athletics has addressed the race issue when you have teams with a variety of cultures in the teams are not perform well together regardless of culture. so again the race's history for whatever reason we are the last ones because the nfl tried to stop the use of the in the week. were they trying to stop non-african-americans from using it? no. they are to stop them because they get fined and suspended. there were trying to stop the sub six because it was used amongst african-americans. we have individuals that will incorporate the negative stereotypical terminologies into their daily language. that is what dan snyder is looking for is where are these guys okay with it so i can showcase you at the india nine note. he said i want the truth and the truth was on a german guy avoiding world war i. that is his truth in terms of a red and justification. again it is on truth racism and interesting from his is why doesn't he honor his own people and he could create some mascots of his own people and go from there. as was eloquently stated, we are the only ones so far without honor that they keep telling us we don't understand who we are. yes, we do. i apologize. i know who i am as a lakota men. keep trying, but we are still here because 90% of us were eliminated, but the last 10% for strong people and now we are descended of those people in this room those tribal members in this room. again a history some are holding onto very dearly. >> that is a great point about the machine and the size the scale is the enterprise. amanda, you have picked a fight with the billionaires club. either way, and then it is no longer suing the national football league. the national football league is suing amanda blackhorse in a federal district court in virginia. so what is that like? >> it was expected. i think the attitude of the owner who says i will never change in name and you can use that in all-caps is very dismissive patronizing and he acts very much like a bully i feel. with that sort of attitude, i knew this was coming. i feel it is very unfair and very uneven here because i am just another native american person out there who grew up on the navajo nation and who went to school to be a social worker so she could go back and help her people and you are going to sue me. i don't feel honored at all. and so been sued by a billionaire you know, the individual that i had i feel it doesn't make any sense. it's really a bad move on their part i think. >> yeah okay. at this point i would like to open it up to the audience and ask if there are any questions for our panel. so we will have some microphones. is that correct? and while we are waiting for that to set up, suzanne, could you give a quick, simple as possible explanation of what the trademark challenge was? what were you doing when you initiate that process? >> well, i didn't understand it at all until stephen baird came to introduce me for a long review article he was working on in 1992. he asked me two questions. he was a patent lawyer from los angeles. he sat why didn't you use the u.s. patent and trademark board as a cause of action for a lawsuit against the washington football franchise to get rid of the trademark? i said i have no idea what you just said. [laughter] nothing makes sense to me about what you just said. so he walked me through it and said there is the trademark trial and appeal board and the patent trademark and the line that says you can't have the trademark license on material or names or images of things that hold other people and hold them up to contempt of things that disparage them. it is just against the law and that has worked in all of these other lawsuits. and i wonder he's sad why you didn't do that. i said because this is literally the first time and never hearing about any of this. before i let him out at this space we were in he became my lawyer and we talked about mounting the lawsuit that we did. it is a pocketbook incentive lawsuit. it doesn't require -- one thing i like as a first amendment champion is that it doesn't require anyone to do anything. what it does is takes away the federal stamp of approval from these racist images, the image and the name. once you do that, you don't have federal protections then they are not going to keep the name. it is as simple as that. it is not that we are making them do it. it is just we are removing their support and that is what the federal trademark trial and appeal board judges did in our case in 1999. they canceled the license pending appeals and then escape through the loopholes of laches which we can go into or not. it just means the passage of time and it means how long you waited -- the way they've made it a lot for this particular case, how long you've waited after turning 18 before filing the lawsuit. that is why when i organized the black -- blackhorse case they were closer to eight team than they were 24 comments so they wouldn't have the same technical problem we had. we didn't lose on the merits. we know they lost on a technicality. so we resolved a technicality in the second lawsuit and the trademark trial and appeal a judge as went in the same direction in our case and gave the blackhorse plaintiffs a favorable decision and in 2014 canceled the trademark licenses. they are removing the federal imprimatur. they are saying we are not backing you. so that is a really good day that it is more and more of society saying we are withdrawing any support you thought you had. so that is really the lawsuit and it is pretty simple and has all of the things for the ordinary person like me who never heard this has been going on. no one told me. >> yeah so it even as i'm in no to win her case the team doesn't have to stop using the name right? but it will have been devalued hopefully sufficiently that they will choose to no longer use that. so that is really the strategy behind all of that. any questions from you all? yes, please come to the microphone a few words. -- if you would. >> my name is justin moore. i have a question. as mark has indicated capitalism is a revolutionary force that includes everything including human beings. dan snyder in chile. my question is what is your response to ben chailly and dan snyder sitting together at the arizona washington game? >> okay, so i think mr. shelley at the varying favorable president at this time. because he has done some very -- [applause] has done some things that are very questionable. when i heard he was sitting up in the box seats, i knew that this was another trick of the washington team, i'd dan snyder because they had been going through indian country and trying to find any native american group president council member or whoever to endorse then and they looked far and wide. it was like a campaign to look for anyone willing to do that for them. they got that with the code talkers. actually just two or three of them. not the code talker association. they got a couple. they got the navajo nation president and make some groups out there. and there are also groups who turned down their gifts as well, too. i think that was just part of a strategy they were using and they got ben chailly. i said i am very ashamed of him as a president that he would do that with such a controversial person at such a controversial time. i actually got a chance to speak with him about it. he was just as dismissive as me as dan snyder has been with me. it is very unfortunate because i feel like we could sit down and have a conversation about it. the navajo nation going into a deal with the navajo arts and crafts enterprise is why people say there is so much poverty on the reservation. this will create jobs. this will put our money into our economy. but at what expense? at what expense are you going to basically sell out? so that is what i think about that. i think it is a personal decision on his part because the navajo nation council does not support the washington team. [applause] >> yes. >> hello my name is neglect to cheney. i'm a doctoral student studying the public policy. you mentioned earlier that indians are malleable to another institution, whatever their need is. so i guess my question and anybody else can answer this, it do. how are the perceptions of american indians how does that impact policy? i'm thinking of particular answers. indians were wars of the state when he was discussing giving up oak flat. that is sort of the mentality perhaps if you could comment on that and afterwards i do have another announcement. >> i'm sorry, what was the last thing? >> i have an announcement. >> well, the way you would expect, right? if people are imaginary, if you are understanding indians based on these imaginary indians that they have been taught about, then they are not going to grasp the depth and complexity of the contemporary issues native american people are bringing forward. when i speak with tribal leaders about museum i say look we have all had this experience and as a tribal attorney and lobbyist for 15 years, had the experience every time there is an election you get a new set of members of congress for county commissioners are state legislators who know they don't know nothing about indians. they know less than nothing because they have been misinformed their entire life. we have to start at the beginning again and very slowly work forward to bring them to some sort of understanding of why we are sitting there. you have to explain simple a black tribes are governments. they are not clubs. they are not just a bunch of people who hang out together that they are government and that is a very old idea that they have always been government the reservations were not given to indians, that there is a reason they are called reservations. they are reserved by the indians. and so you have to overcome a lot of these ideas before you can even get to zero and then start talking about the complexity of issues. so that is why we are always in a race where we have to start 200 yards behind and are still expected to win. it affects policy in all of those things. he would be astounded at how little some people in positions of genuine authority over native american nations. he would be appalled how little they know about this history. and so, naturally the outcomes are not optimal and not what we hoped for. >> i appreciate that. i do want to make an announcement if that is okay. i'm involved in organizing an individual happening or not. a lot of you guys have received the flyers already. it is to drive awareness and connection between how native americans are perceived and the impact it has on violence against women. i hope you guys will help support in attending. >> very good, thank you. [applause] >> is jim's still here? i can't see him. i'm sure he asked. how much longer do we have? okay, good. >> i would like to introduce myself. my name is leonard rivers from salt river, arizona community. i wanted to mention i guess living and growing up around the metropolitan area scottsdale, mesa tempe south hills and all those good cities it was really hard growing up, but especially the media that encouraged and basically turn this into the european attitude culture that we kind of assimilated to wanting cowboys to win over indians in the movies. i was a cowboys fan growing up because of the cowboy name. it was tough. i really appreciate you all being strong enough and smart enough to tell the truth. i worked with the community council, the political side of things. i remember when i first got on council in 1998 working with some representatives from mesa. mesa is right next to us and has been one of the friendliest communities we had that we worked with for a very long time. these representatives have never been on the reservation. they didn't know where the boundaries were. they didn't know other people that lived there. they had no ideas with the issues were. they were the ones representing mass in the state issues. i say this because i think the apathy we have native americans are first americans have, i think that needs to be really worked on and i am glad that again we have people like you and different people around the nation that are doing that. .. i think, again, with hoping us understand this is going to be a big victory down the road and hopefully in communities including ours will be able to take this stuff and really understand and try to put a bigger effort in making sure that we avoid that. so thanks. >> thank you. [applause] >> that brings something in my to me. leo, most of your students i assume our native students in the introductory course. do they come with a real working knowledge of native american history? >> be honest. be honest. >> to be honest, no. it's a great disappointment because i wish that a native high schools, or in high schools with large populations of indian people or even just all high schools in states with large population of indians have some standardized history lessons or something to connect students to contemporary issues. there's such a huge gap and our goal as professors is to try to fill that gap and sometimes, sometimes i feel like we are not doing a good job because when you get at the collegiate level students who have to enrolled in your classes. they can take, you don't have to take indian classes. so there's need for improvement. >> okay. >> i'm dashed okay thank you. i would like to thank you for speaking her mind and allowing me to speak mind. >> why don't you just hold it? it will be easier. weekender you. >> okay. but i was watching the news when the whole march minarets gens game -- during the redskins game and i was wondering how people like you guys thought about people that supported the redskins that were native americans? and i just wondered what you thought about that. >> that's a good question. suzanne, jim? >> how do we feel about the people, the native people who support them? >> yes. >> well, bless their hearts. [laughter] so they will learn in the future, and they want to be with the winners and they think they are by cozying up to the nearest racist white person against them. and they think that means winning. they think it will save them because we are being racist against someone else. so it it's sort of like an abused child. don't hurt me you and him fight. that's what's going on here. they're not the ones we are upset with. we are not upset with the indians who can be rented or bought or who just willingly go with what they perceive is the winning side. and there's no equivalence between the few native people who line up with the washington football team owner and all the major national native organizations who were on one side saying enough is enough get rid of all these racist stereotypes in sport. especially you washington football team. [applause] one navajo official does not offset the fact that the medicine men's association and the navajo human rights commission and the navajo tribal council are all on one side. saying no, we don't like that name. so just one person doesn't offset all of these native people and the people that all of these native organizations represent, entities. we are on the side of the overwhelming navy few of all of this and population and presence, and very comfortably so. i mean it's really a happy place to be, to be not just in the mainstream but wait in the majority, and we are all moving in the same direction. so the fact that you have a few over here kind of stragglers who might be limping along for people who want to ride in the wagons of the white people who think they are hurting us that's okay. because they'll catch up and then pretty soon once we definitively win everything then they will be at the front of the line leaning into our pictures saying, look what we did. and we will welcome them. >> already doing that. you know, the other thing is maybe, jim, you could come on this -- comment on this but it feels like when the team is out there with their foundation and trying to generate tribal support and blessing indian people to the game that they're trying to get us to fight with each other -- bussing -- we just refused to do that. >> first of all thank you my young person for representing and a good way. this is why we are doing it for you and the generation of today. [applause] and i believe you are discussing the oath, i like to call it the original american foundation that daniel snyder suddenly produced 10 months ago. because he's suddenly wanting to do good things for indian people. so that, at least that has happened to where he is now providing money to tribes that are willing to support him. so again, so those tribes that refuses money, those are the ones that have really gotten that message in terms of where we stand as people in america. when we are on the reservation we're trying to survive tomorrow because back home in pine enriched my people are trying to survive. this is not a big issue when survival is the number one issue. but overall when we're talking about how the perspective of us infiltrates our governments they are also ignorant by design, our senators and congresspeople, because they are products of american education. and less they went overseas to europe or asia where they teach more about american indian history than we do here then they will not know about it. and when we start 200 yards kind as they become it is really true because 15 states don't have tribes. therefore, 30 senators don't have to do anything for indian country. so we are already starting way behind when we're going into the halls, and i've walked those calls and talk to those pimply faced staffers they send out and i will discuss issue at a high level on indian country but what do i have to do? back to indian 101. just so they can at least understand who i am as a person and then they don't understand why are you doing this. you'll have casinos. you are all rich now. i'm sorry, how much did donald trump give your family? you are all rich now. it's that level of ignorance is the frustration, but it's happening and the efforts of suzan and many others over the years passed and people are getting that information. so keep up the good fight young person. we appreciate you. [applause] >> my name is donna, and this is my son. used 12. we live here in the valley, and my other two children are up there. i just want to say thank you for all your efforts. i had a conversation with amanda last friday, so i've been a part of this effort since i was in high school. my mother was very much involved, and i remember wearing the promotional t-shirts and sweatshirts with the pennant on it, with the different names where it says like the new jersey jews and the different names, the different takes on it. i wore it for 30 days straight in high school to make a statement. and i got harassed. i got chased home. i fought almost everyday for 30 days. so if you think this doesn't impact youth, i'm an adult that grew up being impacted by these stereotypes and mascots. i grew up in a small farm town in nebraska where i was probably the only brown person in an eight county radius. so i heard it for every single racial group. so if you a lot of people say that this is new, that they haven't heard of it where is this coming from. i'm in my 40s. that happened 30 years ago. it's still happening today. my kids still get teased about their long hair. i just want to say thank you and i really see some momentum with this effort. and i'm so proud of every everybody and everybody's efforts, so thank you very much. [applause] >> thank you. my name is dan quickly and i'm not a native american. i was asked to come in to speak by a friend of mine, peter mcdonald, the president of the navajo code talkers association and he cannot make it because of weather issues. you often call people of native heritage that cheer for these teams sellouts, traders. amanda, i've seen you chase people in the stadiums with their families yelling that they are sellouts and traders. i just wonder with all the issues, native americans in general suffer and i know it's a very diverse culture but the last credible polling company to take this issue on was in 2004 and they found 90% support behind these names. isn't the fight for kind of being created by you guys? >> i met him why don't you go first and then suzan? >> well, first of all i did not chase anyone down, run anyone down or any of that. i'm not sure where you got that from. >> i was there sorry. [inaudible] >> there were a lot of people that were there and who seem a lot. i think the 2004 annenberg poll is -- >> associated press, annenberg poll yes. >> okay, outdated first of all. 2004 was 10 years ago. in the last 10 years many, many things have changed including this movement. a lot of people's minds have changed, native american people and non-native american people. and i think when you look at polls, we are very, very misguided because we are looking at numbers. we are looking at several people participating in these things. the validity of them are just, it's not there. and so i always ask would you lead a civil rights movement to a poll? no. because this is a movement. this is a change movement that is not going anywhere anytime soon. [applause] >> when i hear terms like overwhelming majority in things like that, and i believe you even mention some polling took some wondering where that came from? >> suzan, why don't you talk about the in the purple? >> okay, we do not account and we do know our organizations have members, have constituents but they are responsive response to and responsible for carrying out their wishes. and since the late 1960s and early 1960s for some organizations are major national organizations have all been moving in the same direction. and they represent the overwhelming majority of native people. that's how we know what we are talking about. i used to run one of them the national congress of american indians. one of my co-plaintiffs in a lawsuit ran the council of the american indians in the '60s and i in the '80s. we were not new to this. and you wonder about all the other important issues. we are the ones who did these more important issues. people who ask that question don't do anything for my people. and peter mcdonald, for crying out loud when he was in power he stole from the navajo people. when he -- >> that's inaccurate. >> who voted to represent them. he was convicted and he went to prison for ripping off the people. so i don't call him a sellout. i call him a thief. that's what he was convicted of. [applause] >> now you you and probably you do, i don't know much about you guys are all put up to this by billionaire dictator and ceo of the knight commission incorporate her right -- 2 who pays for all your travel -- [booing] out of work social worker can't fly across the country every week unless she is being bankrolled. and that's where ray comes in. >> no, no, no. no. but this is very valuable. let him finish. you, sir are the one who basically -- when you had of indian affairs were against the will of his own people that recognize him federally as a leader of that nation. it's not a nation, it's a corporation and he's a billionaire up against billionaires, right? so you guys are playing a trick on people trying to act like this is a liberal issue when it really isn't. i'm a liberal got to if i really thought you guys were fight racism i would be holding hands with you. >> well, thank you. let's have somebody else speak. thankthank you very much. >> thank you for demonstrating exactly what we are here for. we do appreciate those perspectives. keep talking. please keep talking in another forum. [applause] >> you call my friends ignorant and their native americans and their ignorant because they choose 14 you don't like? this guy this guy went to mit and asu and he is not ignorant. he's not uneducated. >> we see you come within indian. [laughter] >> excuse me. we met here. he didn't come with me and i didn't come within. i just met him yesterday. the fact is that a majority of native americans support these names. >> thank you. >> sit down. >> let's go ahead and have two more questions. >> my name is christopher. proud graduate of home of the warriors. redskin's -- redskins fan and till i was five result. i've always been around native mascots. i've always traveled with the team's, go off the reservation and play being a fan of the redskins. it's always been a part of my life. for someone like me is i identified with the team to identified with the name and with the logo. and that's always been a source of pride. i'm not the only one. we are not ignorant. we are not uneducated. we know why we are fans and why we support this team. sports is a big joining factor and for us this is a sports issue. we can gather around this and support each other and be proud. there's nothing wrong with that if you're a redskins fan. if you're a native and a redskins fan or any offense of the other teams. i'm not a fan of the other teams but the redskins have always been the one i started with when i was, like i said five years old. that's where started out and that's always been with me. so did a lot of these comments, because this is such a divisive issue. it's probably the most divisive thing that i've seen in a lot of issues and i think a lot of you guys do a lot of good work you know? teaching allowed your activism your energy is awesome. being the head of the smithsonian institute and your work, being a hero to a lot of kids. youth made a lot of did a lot of great things and we heard that through your introduction. but i think for some reason this issue is huge. it's such a divisive thing that would you going to comments on twitter, facebook, you just you're back and forth you're a sellout, you're a racist you're a half breed, you don't count the everything back and forth and i've never been a part of an issue or other issues we just seen natives fighting each other. to me it's like how do we stop this? what's going to be to unite his to better causes, to better things? personally i don't believe that native mascots or native things hurt. luckily i was born surrounded by, you know in a native community, navajo community. went back to my grandparents house. i've always been a part of some type of native whether its traditional ceremony and everything is will so i'm lucky in that way. i've also lived off the reservation. i lived in boston for 12 years. i finished and asu but moved back to boston for 12 more years and it was never an issue. every time i would wear my redskins coach walk around, nothing. no one ever said anything to me but there are there are stereotypes and i have come across them and i've come across racism. i've been called many things, but a lot of this and for a lot of other fans like myself it's never been about the sport. the only thing about sports for us is it's a uniter something we've been able to stick together. i guess what i'm down to my question is what's the end result if this happens? it's dividing people right now. that's, i think that's the scary part of that. >> it doesn't give you cause that doctor manly used to be the principal of the school, was a plaintiff in the original lawsuit against the washington football team or that a navajo commission on human rights and the medicine in association and the tribal council are all on one side of this issue and you and amanda blackhorse and you are on another? doesn't that give you cause just for a moment? >> no, because as i said this is not only been about pride for me. i know the person who didn't have the nation council is a lawyer. a native mascots, it's a redskins bashing thing is what comes down to. you talk about native image. in navajo we have three of them warrior, scouts and redskins. i follow joshua. i went through the. he introduced me to the accounts, went to a council nine people. it's never been to the full council and he's never done anything else. they are trying to impeach him because he doesn't do anything. this was his one chance to get into the national picture and indian country today ran an article about it. a small little story. that's what i'm saying is there are some people that try to take advantage, and i understand that you guys have your issues and have your side, and i respect fully disagree with you guys. but i'm not trying to change your mind. what i want people to know is that there's a lot of natives like me that are fans and we find pride in this team we find pride in the name as a unified to get to -- get-together. >> we know what the greater weight of the people, the people fall. and right now most of our people are moving in one direction. and the people on your side of the issue are not as vocal anymore. it's good that you are being vocal about it and you still have passion about it and we civilly disagree but we're going to prevail. >> i disagree with that. i don't think there's a majority. >> it's an overwhelming majority and you may take issue with that that -- [applause] >> i i disagree with that because i know plenty more and we're starting to speak up more now. >> national congress of american indians, national indian -- just go right through them, go right through them and how many native people they represent, how many people they are. have you been to a national congress of american indians association meeting? you go there, and not one person is on the other side of the issue. i mean, that's our experience. for those of us who meet and make up these policies, we don't just invent them. we make them up because we all agree on this. >> i'm not saying you are making it. i'm just saying i disagree with how you'd -- >> and that's fine you are august in to do that. let me point out that you won't scare me certainly, if you haven't heard anyone tonight talking about sellouts or traitors. because that's just not productive. >> no, no. i'm not an educator or ignorant or needing help. it's like i said, it's such a divisive issue that it's the one that i see the most where people are asking one another. >> thanks for coming. >> thank you for listening. >> ignorance by divine. that's all i can say is ignorance by design. [applause] this will be our last i'm afraid we're out of time. >> my name is brandon. i had a great time tonight. i thought the presentation in the panel were awesome. i don't think it's a question that these mascots portray a horrible indigenous culture, but what i did see was a lot of that ms. represented in injury were of men. and so i wonder if you see stereotypes also affect indigenous women and how indigenous women have been portrayed? and if western colonization has been indigenous women as nothing but docile and domesticated? >> let me just point out pocahontas was a woman. [laughter] spent i mean as the mascots. >> well, yeah. that's a whole nother lecture. the answer is yes. you know native women are stereotyped in ways that, that invite in essence assault on them. and it's an ongoing thing. if you sort of watch the images around native women that shows up in the popular media and popular culture it's a very old theme that native women are in essence representatives of the land itself, rights and available for plunder. and that was the imagery that was used about native american women from the very beginning when europeans first began reporting back to their country saying, you should see this place, and the women, holy cow. that's what it was really all about, and so the answer is yes. and i could've done a powerpoint twice as long with outrageous images of native american women that are contemporary. >> i think overall when you have this level of acceptance in sporting events, everyone is impacted, non-indian and indian alike. when they are saying there's nothing happening none of this racism happening, last weekend rapid city, south dakota, a group of students who earned their way to a free hockey game through academics, not being indian were doused in fear and called -- and i apologize to my african-american brothers and sisters -- the use of this term for us back home go home, prayer he -- that was last week. was anybody arrested or asked to leave the stadium? no. it had to happen after it became in the press. so again these things are happening a lot and i know that i have young women and young men better that will always have a different perspective because of what happened to them last week. that cannot be allowed anymore and if you can have this kind of imagery and be okay with it and american statistics polling says it's okay i say it's not. how many of us does it take to say no more? more? because i care to you if this was an african-american head, you would find that the americans to stay this doesn't bother me. budget also find african-americans who say no way i will allow this to happen to my people. this is what we're asking for is just more understanding and that is what we are having. [applause] >> with that, we want to thank you all for coming here and listening so carefully and participating in the conversation. i want to want to again thank the arizona state university college of law, indian legal program for arranging this event him to the heard museum for hosting the event. thank you all for coming tonight, and we hope you will see you at the heard many times. [applause] [inaudible conversations] .. african-americans, in post-civil war era. >> c-span's congressional freshman profile series concludes with montana republican ryan zinki. he reflects on his military service and role as as a official. >>> we'll hear from anita mack bride that served as chief of staff to mrs. bush. hear that at 9:30 also on c-span >>> next former house majority leader eric cantor and former health and human services secretary kathleen sebelius give their perspectives on the current health care system. that was held at new york university's washington, d.c. campus. >> good evening everyone. i'm michael orr director of nyu washington d.c. i'm happy to welcome to you the abramson family auditorium. we're here for the weisberg forum for the discourse in the public square. this is for thoughtful and respectful discussion of controversial contemporary topics an issues. special things to nina wiseburg around the wiseburg foundation for their generous support of this program. we're greatful for the support of nyu's global institute of public health. the institute is working to arm the next generation of global public health pioneers with the critical thinking skills acumen and entrepreneurial approaches necessary to help solve the world's most pressings public health problems. please join me to welcome dr. cheryl hilton, dean of global public health and director of the nyu institute of public health who will introduce our topic and special guests. [applause] >> thank you michael, for that kind introduction. good evening everyone. i am delighted to welcome you to this installment our wiseburg forum on discourse in the public square cosponsored by nyu-d.c. and global institute of public health. thank you, nina for the support of the wiseburg family for this important event. if the goal of our forum is to explore elements after law which americans sharply disagree, the affordable care act, it is a true case in point of the last month the caser is family foundation reported narrowest margin of difference yet. 43% unfavorable towards aca and 14% in support of it. one thing which we all can agree the situation that prevailed before the passage of the caca was not a good one. over 70 million americans lacked health care coverage and millions more were underinsured and had little access to prevention services. tonight's discussion will help us all better understand the nuances of this intensely debated act but first this complicated law deserves a very brief reform one owe one. i turn to my long-time friend, joseph a califano former secretary of health, education and welfare under president carter and previously president johnson's chief domestics advisor. joe tells illuminating story which i recount here, one can be told in four distinct chapters cliff notes short version of a winding tale about health care access to all americans. chapter one the years before world war ii. during which health insurance itself was actually quite rare. following the second world war unions and some large employers began covering health insurance for union members and employers. chapter, two president truman was was the president to make truly concerted effort to pass coverage for older americans and poor but it was swiftly defeated as socialized medicine. he had to settle for a few amendments to the social security act. the mills act in 1960 covered poor people and older people but while it was meant for the rural poor, the dollars allocated with consumed by high population states like california, massachusetts, new york, leaving its sponsors quite disenchanded. from the time of president truman's first effort forward, medicaid and medicare was part of the platform. chapter 3 when president johnson was elected or appointed soon after the death of president kennedy he told mr. califano we will fight for medicare as long as we have breath in our body. using failure of the mills act and other issues surrounding the lack of coverage for americans they were able to pass medicare and medicaid linked to welfare system. under medicare part b, doctors were protoke teched from socialized medicine. allowed them to be compensated for usual and discussion marry fees. they were represented by american medical association still then and still opposes quote socialized medicine. president johnson traveled to independence missouri, the birthplace of truman's wife beth to sign the law. beth and harry truman were given the first two medicare cards. medicare expansion protected pharmaceutical industry. some contend that aca protects health care industry skirting efficient approach to insure the nation or medicare or single-payer approach. finally we're now at chapter four, which raises the question, did the path we set for ourselves then result in a series of bonanzas? first bonanza for doctors and hospitals. secondly a bonanza for the pharmaceutical industry and third now for the insurance industry itself. or was it as others might argue just the american way? here we are traveled a long circuit does route to near universal access to health coverage, something enjoyed by citizens of over other developed country in the world. we now stand at crossroads with a pivotal supreme court decision anticipated on king versus burwell in late june and election on horizon in november will we stay the course, if we doesn't e don't what are the implications? for that discussion we've turned first to two people who may arguably no more about the aca tan most people on planet. first i'd like to welcome secretary kathleen sebelius who served as the 21st u.s. secretary of health and human services from 2009 through 2013. she also served as governor of kansasfrom 2003 through 2009. secretary sebelius is staunch supporter of the aca. we're honored to have her with us tonight. we're privileged to have with us former house majority leader eric cantor. he served the 7th congressional district of the state of virginia in the u.s. house of representatives from 2001 through 2014. congressman cantor has been a strong voice in opposition to the aca. on a sad note, congressman cantor's father, eddie cantor, passed away just over a week ago. congressman, all of us here convey our heartfelt condolences to you and your family. finally, it will take a strong moderator to guide this discussion. professor steve mack man is perfectly suited to this challenge. steve is an attorney and cofounder of purple strategies llc. he got his start in politics on the senate and political staff of edward kennedy and worked on dozens of senate, gubernatorial and mayoral campaigns across the country. steve served in senior roles in three presidential campaigns including i
Live Music Archive
Librivox Free Audio
Metropolitan Museum
Cleveland Museum of Art
Internet Arcade
Console Living Room
Open Library
American Libraries
TV News
Understanding 9/11
