“Ancestral Ties”
September 5th, 2007, 3:08 pm · 3 Comments · posted by Scott Shackford
These words have been tossed around by those opposing the Big Lagoon/Los Coyotes casinos as the reasons the state legislatures won’t approve the compacts.
I would classify that claim under the “weaselly ways” legislators have managed to duck the issue. In reality, the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act does not require such ties to the land to be considered for gaming. Here’s what it says:
“Indian Lands” Acquired After Enactment of IGRA. Lands acquired in trust after IGRA’s enactment are generally not eligible for gaming if they are outside of and not contiguous to the boundaries of a tribe’s reservation. There are exceptions to this policy, however, that allow gaming on certain “after acquired” or “newly acquired” lands. One exception permits gaming on lands newly taken into trust with the consent of the governor of the state in which the land is located and SOI: (1) consults with state and local officials, including officials of other tribes; (2) determines “that a gaming establishment on the newly acquired lands would be in the best interest of the Indian tribe and its members”; and (3) determines that gaming “would not be detrimental to the surrounding community.”
That’s it. Now the other tribes the governor is obligated to consult with may object to the fact that the proposed tribes don’t have strong historical ties to the land, and that’s exactly what they’ve done, but that doesn’t obligate a particular decision from the state legislature. So again, they’re using a technicality to avoid taking responsibility for folding for money.
Again, I would point out that it’s not particularly shocking that tribes would use this method to try to stop a completing casino — it’s the legislators who are at fault for wimping out. (It’ll likely cost taxpayers millions of dollars if Big Lagoon restores their lawsuit over the state’s insistence they don’t build a casino on their environmentally sensitive reservation. But why should legislators care? — it’s not their money)
To be fair to the other side, the reverse is pretty much true as well. That the Chemehuevi won’t get permission to build a casino in Barstow is based on similarly arbitrary decisions by the government that work against them (that they already have a casino). We don’t have the power to alter the governor’s judgment in that area anymore than we have the power to alter the legislature in the matter of the Big Lagoon/Los Coyotes project.
Now if gambling were legal, none of this would be a problem at all. Though I suspect none of the tribes would be quick to give up their monopoly in exchange for such freedom.
September 5th, 2007 at 9:49 pm
It is amazing how you only bring up what is helpful to Barwest. You should read a bit more, perhaps all of IGRA. What you are discussing is an exception not the rule. And the point you are trying to make is for tribes that already have the land into trust, not tribes that are trying to sneak into another’s territory. Regardless of what the state does, without the land into trust they cannot game on it. Maybe what you should bring up is the “WEASLEY WAY” that Barwest is trying to get around the whole land before compact process. Land into trust is not a overly long process, if the tribe has a clear claim for the land. The fact that years have gone by and still no trust land is quite interesting. But it is nice to see that the Desert Dispatch is condoning further theft of Native American Land, way to go! In the end I can pretty much say anything I want, I don’t have to back my claims up if I choose not to, I am just one person giving my opinion. You on the other hand are supposed to represent an unbiased view based on the facts, however your views are clearly biased. No wonder noone takes what is printed in the Desert Dispatch all that serious when it comes to reporting on gaming.
September 17th, 2007 at 11:49 pm
The Desert Dispatch is a business, a business that lives off advertising. So, what ever the Desert Dispatch says is motivated by profit not the truth. Casinos will advertise and they will make money; DIRTY MONEY. Does casinos ask if their guest are on welfare, food stamps, or any other kind of public assistance before that guest gambles money away? Casinos bring crime and that is a fact. The first MURDER in BULLHEAD CITY, AZ happened just after the first CASINO opened in that parking lot used on the Arizona side for that casino. I am American, a veteran, taxpayer and I can’t own a casino in the state I was born in. THAT IS RACIST. Racism breeds hate, and it is festering. No indian tribe was ever native to Barstow. Barstow was and is a railroad town. The railroad barons had a simple rule: you gamble and your fired. This rule kept cargo/shipments from being lost to pay gambling debts. No tribe was ever called American so stop using the phrase Native American when you mean is Native North American…..I am Native American, a descendant of and part of the country whose U.S Calvary defended us and has prospered and achieved great things to now have them given to others out of PITY. Revolt against those who steal our heritage.
September 18th, 2007 at 10:24 am
I enjoyed your post. Most of it was hard to follow, and your logic is laughable but I still enjoyed it. You are a Native American because your ancestors came to this country? Is that what you’re saying? Don’t see how you can be a Native if your ancestors were immigrants. Maybe you can explain the difference between Native American and Native North American. Oh and loved the statement where you claimed Barstow has been around for all time. Yep Barstow has been here for thousands of years, who knew.