logo
Effort to ban Native American mascots in Illinois would impact 11 metro-east schools

Effort to ban Native American mascots in Illinois would impact 11 metro-east schools

Yahoo11-04-2025

A bill that would prohibit schools from using names, logos or mascots associated with Native Americans, including specific tribes, is headed to the Illinois Senate.
The proposed legislation, which passed in the Illinois House of Representatives on Thursday with a 71-40 vote, could impact at least 11 metro-east schools. These include the Mascoutah Indians, Collinsville Kahoks, Cahokia High School Comanches and Whiteside Junior High's Warriors.
The bill has raised conversations on the House floor and beyond about the best ways to teach and preserve the state's Native American history and if this can be done appropriately through schools' mascots and imagery.
'We do find it important to celebrate and recognize in a positive way what the Indian mascot means,' Mascoutah School District 19 Superintendent David Deets said. 'To Mascoutah, and I'm sure to other districts in Illinois, our Indian mascot is a source of pride and honor.'
But proponents of the bill said there are ways to commemorate the state's Native American roots that won't be seen as divisive, racist or offensive.
'This argument that we are somehow teaching history and learning history through these mascots is nonsense,' Rep. Laura Faver Dias (D-Grayslake), who is a former teacher, said on the House floor Thursday. 'Find a better way to teach and learn history.'
The bill was brought forth by Rep. Maurice A. West, the lawmaker behind the Freeburg mascot bill, which passed the Illinois House earlier this week.
Names of federally recognized tribes and historical Native American people
Mascots depicting Native Americans
Imagery associated with Native American people, such as feathered headdresses, tomahawks and arrowheads
Terms like 'Redskins, Braves, Chiefs, Chieftains, Tribe, Indians, or any synonymous term, logo or mascot depicting Native Americans'
However, the amended legislation would allow a school to continue using the name of a federally recognized tribe, and an agreed upon logo and mascot, so long as the tribe gives permission. The tribe and the school must also partner to create policies that prohibit slurs, stereotypes and other offensive portrayals.
A school can continue using uniforms or other materials purchased before the legislation's effective date that feature the name, logo or mascot until September 2030 so long as they don't acquire any more of such materials. They must also have chosen a new name, logo or mascot by July 1, 2026.
The bill does not provide any funding mechanisms to make such changes. Deets and Collinsville School District 10 Superintendent Brad Skertich said even with the given lead time, the alterations could have multi-million dollar implications.
'At a time when everything is getting more expensive and when looking at our priorities in terms of safety, security, technology, finding high quality staff, … spending over $2 million on a mascot or logo change, whether over five years or 10 years, is not a responsible use of funds,' Skertich said.
The National Indian Education Association and American Psychological Association previously made statements on the harm Native mascots may bring, including how it can perpetuate racial stereotypes and inaccurate portrayals of Indigenous culture, as well as impacting the self-esteem of Indigenous youth.
'Yes, there's a cost to schools to make these changes, but there is a cost to not doing that … to students' mental health (and) a cost to the culture and climate of the school,' Faver Dias said. 'Frankly, sometimes there is a cost to doing the right thing.'
The Mascoutah school district received a letter of support from the Native American Guardians Association. The Association's motto, 'educate, not eradicate,' is one Deets repeats. Skertich said the Collinsville district has a formal letter of endorsement from the Western Cherokee Nation of Arkansas and Missouri to use the Kahok mascot.
The Western Cherokee Nation of Arkansas and Missouri is not a federally recognized tribe.
'We've been doing this right for a long time, let us continue that opportunity,' Skertich said.
All House members from the metro-east voted against the bill.
Rep. Amy Elik, R-Godfrey: No
Rep. David Friess, R-Red Bud: No
Rep. Jay Hoffman, D-Swansea: No
Rep. Charlie Meier, R-Okawville: No
Rep. Kevin Schmidt, R-Millstadt: No
Rep. Katie Stuart, D-Edwardsville: No

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

CCTV Script 06/06/25
CCTV Script 06/06/25

CNBC

timean hour ago

  • CNBC

CCTV Script 06/06/25

The war of words between Elon Musk and Donald Trump, which seemed to escalate almost hourly, has already cost real money in the capital markets. Overnight, Musk's personal net worth reportedly fell by approximately $34 billion. By aligning the timing of their social media exchanges with Tesla's stock movements, a clear pattern emerges: as the feud grew more intense, with language becoming increasingly blunt and emotional, Tesla's share price continued to slide. Many analysts believe that Tesla's stock is likely to remain volatile. To assess its future trajectory, we can start with the trigger of this conflict: a recently passed House spending bill. One provision would eliminate tax credits for electric vehicles—directly impacting Tesla. JPMorgan analysts estimate that the new legislation could cut Tesla's annual profits by around $1.2 billion. However, some market observers note that both Musk and others in the industry had long anticipated that the Trump administration would eventually scrap EV subsidies. This expectation has been priced in—it was only a matter of timing. But of even greater consequence is the second layer of impact: the broader regulatory posture of the White House toward Musk, particularly in the autonomous driving space. Timing is critical. Next week, Tesla is expected to debut its long-awaited Robotaxi service in Austin, Texas. Progress in self-driving technology has been a key reason many investors remain bullish on Tesla. But the breakdown in Musk's relationship with Trump could undermine those expectations. "there's a view that the battle here going on between musk and Trump, that this is going to continue to sort of, you know, increase, and with that, ultimately does is that autonomous and the regulatory vision does Trump now, now not start to play nice in the sandbox with musk.""Elon Musk, as brilliant as he can be, can also be mercurial and impetuous. CUT TO from a trading perspective, I think the stock could easily trade down into the 250s 260s until you get some support." Beyond the personal feud, the spotlight is also shifting to the broader relationship between Silicon Valley—the U.S. tech hub—and Washington, D.C.—the political center. As Musk and Trump move from allies to adversaries, their split is drawing attention to the evolving dynamic between big tech and federal power. Analysts told CNBC that during Trump's first term, major tech firms often found themselves in the administration's crosshairs. Companies like Meta, Google, and to some extent Apple were all named in antitrust inquiries. Now, the rift between Musk and Trump may open new doors for tech leaders who have had tense relations with Musk. For instance, Jeff Bezos—who also leads a space company—has in recent months made efforts to court Trump more closely, reportedly taking cues from Musk's political playbook. This shift may also present an opportunity for Sam Altman, CEO of AI startup OpenAI. "If you're a startup that's trying to make big names or big headlines with investments for the US, that's probably a good place to be." Still, some analysts caution that this overnight drama may not deserve too much attention. A defining feature of the Trump-era policymaking process has always been its volatility—things can shift dramatically within just a few hours. What ultimately matters is returning to the fundamentals and taking a long-term view of where the industry—and the economy—are heading.

Johnson: Deploying Marines to Los Angeles protests would not be ‘heavy-handed'
Johnson: Deploying Marines to Los Angeles protests would not be ‘heavy-handed'

Yahoo

time2 hours ago

  • Yahoo

Johnson: Deploying Marines to Los Angeles protests would not be ‘heavy-handed'

House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) said Sunday that deploying the Marine Corps to Los Angeles to suppress protests, as Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has suggested, would not be 'heavy-handed.' 'Secretary Hegseth said that active-duty Marines there at Camp Pendleton, there by San Diego, are on high alert and could be mobilized. Could we really see active-duty Marines on the streets of Los Angeles?' ABC News's Jonathan Karl asked on 'This Week.' 'You know, one of our core principles is maintaining peace through strength. We do that on foreign affairs and domestic affairs as well. I don't think that's heavy-handed,' Johnson responded. Trump deployed 2,000 National Guard members to the Los Angeles area on Saturday amid protests against Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said the action was due to 'violent mobs' attacking federal agents 'carrying out basic deportation operations.' 'The National Guard, and Marines if need be, stand with ICE,' Hegseth said in a post on the social platform X on Sunday morning. Deploying active-duty forces against Americans on U.S. soil would be an extraordinary move and would require bypassing laws that prevent the military from being used for domestic law enforcement purposes. There's also little precedent for deploying the National Guard to states that have not requested the help. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) on Sunday went after Trump over the deployment of the National Guard to the Los Angeles area, saying the president 'thinks he has a right to do anything.' 'He does not believe in the Constitution; he does not believe in the rule of law,' Sanders told CNN's Dana Bash on 'State of the Union.' 'My understanding is that the governor of California, the mayor of the city of Los Angeles, did not request the National Guard, but he thinks he has a right to do anything he wants,' he added. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store