Combatants in the battle over the Prop. 5 Indian gaming initiative raised more than $58 million and spent more than $53 million by the end of September, reports filed Monday show.
The filings show the Yes on 5 campaign raised $42.7 million compared to $15.5 million for the No on 5 effort. Yes on 5 outspent its opponents by a 2-1 ratio, $36 million to $17 million.
Representatives of both campaigns said total spending on the measure is likely to reach $75 million by the Nov. 3 election and could exceed the record of more than $80 million spent on five insurance initiatives in 1988.
Prop. 5 would allow the state's approximately 40 Indian gaming tribes to continue their current casino operations, which federal prosecutors say are illegal, without limits on the number of electronic games they offer. Eleven tribes have signed compacts with Gov. Wilson that allow them to operate new electronic game devices but impose limits on each tribe's number of machines.
Frank Schubert, manager of the No on 5 campaign, called the spending on behalf of the initiative staggering, noting that more than $31 million came from two Inland tribes. The San Manuel Indians in Highland provided $21.8 million, including $19 million in loans, while the Morongo Indians in Banning donated and loaned more than $9.5 million.
"This proves that Prop. 5 is not about helping poor impoverished Indians," Schubert said. "It shows this is about two tribes that are spending millions of dollars to get a special deal for themselves."
Supporters of the ballot initiative said Prop. 5 has been endorsed by 85 of the state's 106 federally recognized tribes, representing 96 percent of all California Indians living on reservations, and is opposed by only four tribes. Prop. 5 has received direct financial support from about 20 tribes.
They said their spending is necessary to combat an opposition campaign funded almost entirely by Nevada casinos. Nine casino companies contributed $15.2 million to the No on 5 campaign, accounting for more than 98 percent of its funds.
Almost $13 million came from three companies that operate Nevada casinos: Circus Circus Enterprises Inc., Hilton Hotels Corp. and Mirage Resorts Inc. William G. Bennett, chairman and chief executive officer of Sahara Gaming Corp., and six other Nevada casino companies added $2,275,000.
"Nevada casinos are spending millions to protect their billion-dollar profits, while the Indians are defending their economic survival," said Yes on 5 spokesman Steve Glazer. He cited a study by Wilson's planning and research office in the early 1990s that estimated Californians spend $3.8 billion in Nevada each year, generating $8.8 billion and 196,000 jobs for the Nevada economy.
"Prop. 5 will keep some of those jobs and revenues in California," Glazer said.
Cathy Christian, legal adviser to the No on 5 campaign and a lobbyist for Circus Circus, called complaints that the opposition campaign is funded by Nevada casinos irrelevant.
"Thank God they are providing money so we can put our message on television," Christian said. "Without it, the Californians who are lined up against Prop. 5 wouldn't be able to get our message out."
Although the Yes on 5 campaign has accounted for two-thirds of all the funds spent on the measure, the financial battle has been less one-sided in recent months. The Yes on 5 total includes $8 million spent earlier to collect signatures to place the measure on the ballot.
During the last three months, Yes on 5 raised $16.4 million and No on 5 raised $14.6 million. Yes on 5 reported spending $23.3 million during the same period, while No on 5 spent $15.8 million.
Christian said the reports "confirm that this is about a few very rich tribes, representing a very small number of people who will go to any lengths to avoid the kind of off-site regulation that covers all other gambling." She said the campaign is not about whether California will have Indian casinos but about whether they will be regulated.
Glazer said gaming tribes are financing the Prop. 5 campaign to protect the rights of all California Indians.
"Fewer than half of California's tribes have gaming, and most of those tribes are just getting by," he said. "The wealthier tribes are spending to protect the less fortunate ones."
Published 10/6/1998