When one thinks about the Iowa Senate and the work it does, topics that immediately come to mind are the economy, agriculture or the education system in Iowa. These are all things that directly impact anyone living in this great state, so using Senate time and its resources are clearly warranted.

However, one topic has been introduced as of late and has nothing to do with Iowans, but instead with college students who make up the Stanford University band.

As you may recall, the Iowa Hawkeyes got their you-know-what handed to them at the Rose Bowl on Jan. 1 by the Stanford Cardinal. While the pitiful matchup caught a lot of people’s attention, so did the actions put forth by the Stanford marching band. Stanford is known to go a bit overboard when it comes to its performances, but this instance added insult to injury for Iowa fans.

The band had a few of its members dress up as a dancing cow, and during its halftime show, which ESPN cut away from during its broadcast of the game, the band got into a frowning farmer formation.

In the moment, Iowans, fans of the Hawkeyes or not, were upset by their stunt. However, as time wore on, the offense seems to have fallen off of the public’s radar screen. That is, except for that of Sen. Mark Chelgren, R-Ottumwa.

Chelgren has proposed a bill to the Senate regarding the actions of the Stanford band, saying until Stanford officials apologize publicly to Iowans for condoning the band’s behavior, none of the three major public universities in Iowa will be allowed to work with Stanford on anything. Well, everything except more football games. In what world does that idea have any logic since the issue started at a football game?

The words tragically immature come to mind when thinking about this proposal because if it were to come to fruition it would deprive all four universities, Stanford included, of a relationship that has had a positive impact on education in years past. But perhaps the worst part is that relationship would have ended from something as trivial as a football game.

Thinking about it in more depth, there really is no overwhelmingly positive outcome from this bill because the cost greatly outweighs the benefits, and the Senate should understand that. However, if it doesn’t see that factor, then perhaps it will see that it has mountains of other things to which it should turn its attention.

The United States will elect its next president this year, and the implications the election will have on Iowans should top the petty apology demand being made by a man who’s holding a grudge far too tightly.