President Trump has resurrected the Redskins controversy. He picked this time because the team is requesting approvals to build a new stadium on the site of old RFK Stadium, which has been demolished. In April of this year, the team and the DC government, which holds a 99-year lease on the site, announced plans to build a $3.7 B stadium on the site. A Washington Post article reported that the D. C. Council had advanced the project on August 1. $1B would come from public funds and another $1B in tax breaks for the team. The team would pay $1 a year for 30 years to use the facility. After that, they would pay unstated full rent. An ESPN article that day put the team’s investment at $2.7B plus the cost of overruns. It is yet to be seen how the financial arrangement would work out.
In July, President Trump threatened to hold up the new stadium deal unless the team reverts back to using Redskins as its name again. Although wanting to retain the Commanders name, owners Josh Harris and David Blitzer have been warning business associates privately that the President does have some leverage over the stadium. What might that leverage be?
Advancement of the plan does not mean approval. It will need approvals from US agencies such as the National Capital Planning Commission and the US Commission of Fine Arts, both of which have Trump appointees on their boards. It will also need to be approved by the Trump administration’s environmental team.
D. C. Council Chairman Phil Mendelsohn told a local radio station, 106.7 The Fan, that he would have no problem with the name change and thought the city would welcome the team back if it was renamed. He cited past opposition to the Redskins name had more to do with the widely disliked owner Dan Snyder than the team name.
The Native American Guardians Association (NAGA) has been arguing for retaining Indian team names for several years. Their motto, “Educate not Eradicate,” fears eliminating team names is just another means of eradicating Indians. They cite polls of Native Americans in which 90% of respondents have no problems with Redskins. NAGA finds Commanders as representing oppressors.
Tom Benjey's Weblog 
