Washington D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser (D) is among the legion of politicians who has taken a stand against the name of Washington’s NFL franchise because it is offensive to Native Americans. She has previously committed to not saying the name, and in 2012 she was a member of the city council that unanimously approved a resolution condemning its continued use.
Now, though, Bowser is attempting to enter her city into the looming bidding war for a new stadium for the franchise, and in multiple recent interviews, she has taken to saying it again. “There’s only one place for the Washington Redskins, and that’s at RFK,” Bowser told Washington area radio station WMAL last week. “We know the perfect location for the Redskins is where they played for decades very successfully,” she said in another interview (in a tweet promoting her WMAL interview, she called it “the Washington football team”).
Bowser reiterated her position this week that she doesn’t use the name because it is “offensive to many people,” and challenged by a Washington Post reporter, she said that she “may have slipped and used it” in interviews. But according to NBC Washington’s Mark Seagraves, that isn’t the case. Instead, Bowser may be using the name again to help lure the team, which currently plays in Landover, Md., back to the District.
Sources say DC @MayorBowser has been advised to use @Redskins name in public as sign of good faith to team owner Dan Snyder.
— Mark Segraves (@SegravesNBC4) May 11, 2015
Bowser’s use of the name doesn’t just put her at odds with her past position but with a growing national movement too. The efforts to change Washington’s name have drawn national political and media attention to smaller fights. California followed the D.C. Council resolution with one of its own and is on the cusp of becoming the first state to ban schools from using the moniker. School districts in several other states have forced name changes. The D.C. Council could still render Bowser’s efforts moot, but her use of the term still sends the message that the offense the name causes is less important than luring the team back to the city, especially as the two other governors vying for the team’s presence in their state — Maryland’s Larry Hogan (R) and Virginia’s Terry McAuliffe (D) — support keeping the name.
The ultimate goal of using the name again, though, would have little benefit for Bowser’s city or constituents. The mayor might argue that moving the team back to D.C., via a new stadium that could demand some $500 million in public money, would be good for the city, its economy, and its broader development efforts. But academic research and real-life experiences provide plenty of evidence that stadiums aren’t economic boons and often cause long-term financial problems for their cities and states. D.C. could already face problems funding major District priorities because of money it approved for a new soccer stadium, and that sum is small compared to the cost of an NFL venue.
In other words, there is little obvious benefit from Bowser’s new-found use of the term. She is still unlikely to win the bidding war for the team — all signs point to Virginia — and it’s hard to see how it would be good for anyone in the city who isn’t a developer if she did. And for that slim chance to put a dent in the city’s finances, she has apparently chosen to compromise her position in the battle over the team’s name.