Posted at 7:06 p.m. PDT Saturday, September 19, 1998
Q&A with Gubernatorial Candidates
San Jose Mercury News Staff Report
What is your position on the Indian gaming initiative and
generally do you believe Indian gaming should be expanded or
curtailed in California?
DAVIS: Federal law recognizes the independent sovereignty
of
California's Indian tribes. As such, I believe we should treat our tribes
with the same respect and deference that we give any foreign
government. I oppose the Pala Compact. While the Pala Band of
Mission Indians are entitled under the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act,
signed into law by President Reagan, to negotiate a compact with the
Governor, federal law provides each tribe that independent right to
compact with the state. As such, the governor is acting in bad faith by
imposing the terms of the Pala Compact on the other tribes. However, I
also have concerns about the provisions of Proposition 5. I am
concerned that its language may be too far-reaching, and that it does
not provide basic worker rights for casino employees. My position on
the Proposition, however, is neutral because I strongly support the
sovereignty of Indian tribes. California should not legislate by initiative
to the degree that it currently occurs.
LUNGREN: I oppose Proposition 5 because it would take the decision
making on Indian gaming away from the regular legislative process. It
would expand casino-type gaming, Las Vegas-type gaming all over the
state of California. I instead support the Pala Compact, with which at
lest 10 other tribes have agreed. The Pala Compact would provide
Indian tribes with the ability to maintain gaming, keep their sovereignty
and give workers in these casinos, restaurant and hotels the protection
of California law.