By Jeff Barker
Republic Washington Bureau
Oct. 15, 1998
WASHINGTON -- As Congress nears its election recess, a group of senators is attempting to use a budget bill to block the explosive growth of Indian gaming across the nation.
The senators, supported by the Las Vegas casino industry and the Christian Coalition, pushed an amendment Wednesday that, in effect, would give states veto power over any new Indian casinos.
Indian gaming advocates say the amendment could end the expansion of Indian gaming, which generates more than $6 billion a year in revenues. The tribes' advocates fear the amendment would short-circuit one of the most important economic development tools for tribes.
The amendment would deny the legal leverage that many tribes need to require resistant states to enter into gambling agreements. Tribes believe the amendment runs contrary to a 1988 federal law requiring states and tribes to make good-faith efforts at reaching casino agreements.
Even if the amendment is passed, Arizona tribes will be on a better footing than their counterparts around the nation.
That's because Arizona voters approved a 1996 proposition directing the governor to enter into negotiations with tribes that don't already have a gambling agreement. That proposition provided Arizona tribes with a level of protection that Indians in most other states don't enjoy.
Seventeen Arizona tribes have signed gaming compacts with the state. They include the Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community, which previously offered only poker but won a compact in August and now plans to build two casinos.
The Arizona pacts begin expiring in 2003 and will need to be renewed or rewritten. Former Gov. Fife Symington had said he wouldn't sign any more agreements, but Gov. Jane Hull has been receptive to negotiations. Hull was traveling Wednesday and unavailable for comment.
The Clinton administration was trying to convince lawmakers Wednesday that it was unfair to permit states to ignore tribes' casino aspirations. At the end of 1997, 275 Indian gambling operations existed in 28 states.
"The administration is going up against a lot of political pressure generated by the governors and by the anti-gambling people and, frankly, being generated by the casino industry in Las Vegas," said Kevin Gover, assistant Interior secretary for Indian affairs.
"Their theory is that a dollar that goes into an Indian casino is a dollar that did not go into Las Vegas. What they're really doing is a disservice to tribal-state relations."
But the amendment's chief sponsor denies that the measure is a "Las Vegas protection bill."
"I want everyone to be perfectly clear on this point," Sen. Michael Enzi, R-Wyo., said in a recent speech on the Senate floor. "This amendment is designed primarily for states that do not allow gambling. ... We don't want casino gambling in Wyoming."
Among those signing on to Enzi's bill were Sens. Harry Reid, D-Nev.; John Ashcroft, R-Mo.; Sam Brownback, R-Kan.; and Dan Coats, R-Ind.
Enzi said the Christian Coalition had written a letter of support for his amendment because its members are "very concerned about the explosion of unregulated gambling in America."
Arizona Sen. John McCain, a Republican, has called the amendment "unwarranted" and "ill-advised."
In 1996, the Supreme Court, in a 5-4 decision, removed tribes' most critical bargaining chip - the threat of a federal lawsuit - if states don't negotiate casino deals in good faith. The court said states are immune from such suits under the Constitution.
Last January, in the wake of that decision, Interior Secretary Bruce Babbitt sought to restore the Indians' gaming rights by proposing a plan that would have the Interior Department step in to negotiate gaming agreements directly with tribes when states are uncooperative.
But Congress passed legislation effectively blocking Babbitt's proposal through the end of the last fiscal year, which expired Sept. 30.
In his amendment, Enzi proposes to continue to prevent Babbitt's plan from taking effect. He believes Babbitt is overstepping his authority and trampling states' rights.
Enzi hopes the amendment will be attached to a $500 billion package of spending for education and other programs.
But Gover said, "We're dead set against this thing, and we'll fight it until we drop."