After a great deal of speculation wondering whether or not he would, Gov. Scott Walker signed the Indian tribal mascot bill.

Walker’s statement channeled the inner libertarian no one knew he had:

“I am very concerned about the principle of free speech enshrined in our U.S. Constitution.  If the state bans speech that is offensive to some, where does it stop? A person or persons’ right to speak does not end just because what they say or how they say it is offensive.  Instead of trying to legislate free speech, a better alternative is to educate people about how certain phrases and symbols that are used as nicknames and mascots are offensive to many of our fellow citizens.  I am willing to assist in that process.

“With that in mind, I personally support moving away from nicknames or mascots that groups of our fellow citizens find seriously offensive, but I also believe it should be done with input and involvement at the local level.”

Well, maybe he does see it as a First Amendment issue. The cynical view is that Indian tribes give neither votes nor money to Republicans, whereas conservatives would be offended by a veto, so Walker signed the bill.

Regardless of motive, Walker did the right thing. There is no, and has never been any, intent to pick a nickname or mascot for the purpose of self-denigration. Complaints about self-esteem and institutional racism are a bunch of politically correct horse manure.

For some inexplicable reason, the state Democratic Party felt the need to send a news release with quotes from someone named Arvina Martin, listed as “(Ho-Chunk, Stockbridge-Munsee), chair of the Democratic Party of Wisconsin American Indian Caucus:

“In a time where public opinion moves against the use of American Indian imagery as school mascots, I am saddened that Governor Walker decided to take Wisconsin backwards by signing AB 297, regarding race based mascots in our public schools into law.

“Walker falsely claims that signing this legislation will protect the free speech rights of school districts while failing to realize that First Amendment does not allow government programs, in this case, schools, to offend, harm or otherwise discriminate against citizens.

“With a stroke of his pen, Governor Walker ignored the statements of many, both American Indian and non-American Indian, in order to push through legislation that does nothing but further marginalize American Indians in our state.”

Martin, not surprisingly, didn’t consult those with opposing views before her blanket “public opinion” statement. Consider a newspaper poll in an area with numerous Indian-nicknamed high schools, asking whether high schools should be required to change their Indian nicknames:

• Yes: 24.
• No: 174.
• “It depends on the nickname”: 70.

Only a PC-sodden reading of the First Amendment allows protection from being “offend”ed. I wonder how opponents of abortion rights feel about government funds — that is, their own tax dollars — funding abortions. I suspect they are considerably more than offended, but what is their recourse? None. For that matter, I am offended that state legislators make as much money by themselves as the average family in this state. To quote John Cougar Mellencamp, my opinion means nothing.

Since I had never heard of Martin before last week, I have no idea if she’s an elected official somewhere. I certainly hope she never becomes an elected official outside a reservation, because her view of the First Amendment is an offense by itself.

The head of the state’s education establishment, Superintendent of Public Instruction Tony Evers, isn’t happy either:

“The children of Wisconsin are not served well when legislation makes it more difficult for citizens to object to discrimination they see in local schools. There is a growing body of research documenting the negative educational outcomes associated with the use of American Indian mascots, logos, and nicknames. Yet this new law requires the signatures of 10 percent of a school district’s membership to file a complaint about an Indian mascot or logo. In no other situation of harassment, stereotyping, bullying, or discrimination must an individual gather signatures from others to have the matter considered by a government body.

“While many local school districts have moved away from race-based mascots, there are a few left.
Civil rights issues have seldom been resolved locally. This law is a disservice to the children of Wisconsin and their education.”

Evers is not only himself “a disservice to the children of Wisconsin and their education”; now he’s throwing not-so-veiled threats. (Since court challenges to school mascots have failed anywhere, I’d suspect Evers’ threat is an empty threat, except that you can’t guarantee that in an Obama appointee-poisoned federal judicial system.) To make this is a civil rights issue is to cheapen the entire concept of civil rights. (And it once again makes me wonder why in the world Wisconsin conservatives cannot find a candidate to remove Evers and his predecessors of the last 40 or so years and find an advocate for the two groups of people whose opinion should count in schools — parents and taxpayers — more by far than they do.)

As long as we’re being cynical here, I’m surprised an obvious solution didn’t come to the minds of tribal leadership. The tribes are making millions of dollars every day from their Wisconsin casinos. School districts are living in fiscally lean times, thanks to the abuses of government of the past. Most of the school districts with Indian mascots probably would have been just fine with changing them had the tribes been willing to pay the costs of the changeover — athletic uniforms, school signage and so on.