Indian gaming
This article is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License. It uses material from the Wikipedia article "Indian_gaming".

Indian Gaming enterprises comprise gambling businesses operated on Indian reservations or tribal land, which have limited sovereignty and therefore the ability to exist outside of direct state regulation.

In 1987, in a case called Cabazon Band of Mission Indians v. California, the U.S. Supreme Court recognized that, as sovereign political entities, federally recognized Native American tribal entities could operate gaming facilities free of state regulation. The foundation for this case was laid in an earlier case, Bryan v. Itasca County, in 1976. Following Bryan, Indian tribes began engaging in high stakes bingo and other gambling enterprises. By 1987, when Cabazon Band reached the Supreme Court, Indian gaming was a $500 million industry. Soon after the Cabazon Band opinion affirmed the Bryan decision and ratified the tribal legal theory supporting the right to engage in Indian gaming, Congress enacted the 1988 Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA), which sets the terms for how Native American tribal entities are permitted to operate casinos and bingo parlours. Tribal entities such as the Chickasaw Nation and the Choctaw Nation in Oklahoma near large cities have been particularly successful. Generally, a tribal entity is permitted to operate gaming facilities if anyone in the state is permitted to.

Initially there was hope that tribe-operated casinos would provide a source of income for Native American communities and aid ongoing reservation economic development. Many tribal governments have seen substantial improvements in their ability to provide public services to their members, building schools, making infrastructural improvements, and shoring up the loss of native traditions. Tribal gaming operations have not been without controversy, however. A small number of tribes have been able to distribute large per-capita payments, generating considerable public attention. Others describe examples of small groups of people with dubious Native American heritage who have been able to gain federal recognition for the sole purpose of establishing a tax-exempt casino.citation needed In addition, some studies suggest that the presence of gambling establishments on reservations has led to an increase in the rate of compulsive gambling on reservations.citation needed Additionally, the national expansion of Indian Gaming has led to a practice critics call reservation shopping.[1] This term describes tribes that, with the backing of casino investors, attempt to locate a casino out of their indigenous homeland, usually near a large urban center. However, although authorized by the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act, only three such "off-reservation" casinos have been built to date.

In 2006, Congress introduced necessary to protect their own casino interests from those tribes that are outside the region. Further, the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) has faced increasing pressure to tighten up regulatory approval and oversight of casino approvals. In particular, the BIA has been instructed by Congress to implement new procedures after two decades of IGRA's existence. These procedures would allow local communities to have more say in the siting of casinos in their community and would make the process of casino approval more transparent than it is today. To many tribes, however, the proposed regulations would further encroach on tribal sovereignty.


content

Contents

The Indian Gaming Industry

 This page is in the middle of an expansion or major revamping.
You are welcome to assist in its construction by editing it as well.

If this article has not been edited in several days, please remove this template. Consider not tagging with a deletion tag unless the page hasn't been edited in several days.

Although in the 1950's after tribal victories over the governmental and cultural oppression had yielded a dynamic transformation, economic success fell short in comparison to that [2]. The unemployment was down and personal income had increased, but only a handful of tribes had made economic changes. Their strides were spotty and fluctuated greatly from each Indian reservation. This was happening because their lands were not economically beneficial and were far away from prospering markets. In order to fix the poverty in their lands, the Indians must deal with an economic development of some type. The emergence of realty in Indian reservations served as a minute increase in jobs and companies, but tribal gaming served as the single largest amount of income into the Indian community throughout their entire history. But as with every new Indian way of benefiting themselves, the United States must oppose and eventually regulate the Indian gaming industry.

Controversy rose when Indians began putting private casinos, bingo rooms, and lotteries on their Indian reservation along with setting prizes above the maximum legal limit of the state. The Indians argued again for sovereignty over their reservations; to make them immune from state laws. States were afraid that the Indians would have a large competitive edge against other regulated gambling places in the state thus generating a vast amount of income. In the late 1970's the delicate question hovered over the Supreme Court for a decade over whether its legal for tribes to have operations valid under tribal law but against state law [3]. The Supreme Court realized the potential gambling has for organized crime.

The Seminole Tribe of Florida built a large high-stakes bingo building on their reservation near Fort Lauderdale, Florida. The tribal Chairman Howard Tommie executed the leadership for this construction and planned the bingo hall to be opened six days a week, against Florida state law which only allows two days a week for bingo halls to be open and going over the maximum limit of $100 jackpots [4]. The sheriff of Broward County, where the Indian reservation lies, made arrests the minute the bingo hall opened, and the tribe sued (Seminole tribe v. Florida) the county stating that federal government has the authority to intervene in Indian affairs as District court ruled in favor of the Indians, citing Chief John Marshall in Worcester v. Georgia. Here began the legal war of Indian gaming with a win for the Seminoles.

In California, the Cabazon Band of Mission Indians near Indio, CA were extremely poor and did not have much land because of blocked 1850's treaties by the senators. As Stuart banner states the Cabazon Band and the neighboring Morongo Reservation had, "some HUD buildings and a few trailers, but that was about it [5]. There was nothing really there. The people simply didn't have a lot." Indian gaming was what they turned to. The Cabazon's opened bingo and poker halls in 1980, but the Indio police and the Riverside County Sheriff shut down the entire gambling halls and arrested numerous Indians while seizing any cash and merchandise. The Cabazon sued in federal court (California v. Cabazon Band) and won just like the Seminole Tribe in Florida[6]. Although the tribes won in the lower courts, the Supreme Court reviewed the case in 1986 over whether Indian reservations are above state law. The court again ruled that Indian gaming was to be regulated exclusively by Congress and the federal government, not state government; tribal sovereignty upheld and the notion of Indian gaming flourished to each tribe.

Class III Indian gaming became a large issue for the states and federal government As Congress debated over a bill for Indian gaming called the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act. Gaming in general is divided into 3 classes. Class I and Class II gambling are traditional Indian gaming such as bingo halls, poker halls, and lotteries; this does not require a license to open these up. Class III gambling are with high jackpots and high-stake games such as casinos, jai alai, and racetracks, and states feared that organized crime would manifest from the Indian Class III gaming on their reservations. In 1988 Congress passed the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA)(signed by President Ronald Reagan) which kept tribal sovereignty to create casino like halls, but the states and Indians must be in Tribal-State compacts and the federal government has the power to regulate the gaming[7]. Essentially, the tribes still have "exclusive right" to all class of gaming except when states do not accept that class or it clashes with federal law[8].

When President Reagan signed the IGRA, Indian gaming revenue skyrocketed from $100 million in 1988 to $16.7 billion in 2006[9] Following the IGRA, the National Indian Gaming Commission was created as a federal agency in 1988 to regulate high-stakes Indian gaming. 200 of the 562 federally recognized tribes created Class III gaming of large casinos and high jackpots[10].

The most recent Indian gaming statistics, provided by the National Indian Gaming Commission (NIGC), indicate that there are approximately 400 Indian gaming establishments in the United States. These casinos are operated by approximately 220 federally recognized tribes and offer Class I, Class II and Class III gaming opportunities. The revenues generated in these establishments is close to $18.5 billion. Currently, the largest casino in the United States, Foxwoods Casino, is owned by the Mashantucket Pequot Tribe and located in Ledyard, Connecticut. The second largest casino in the world is located a few miles away, Mohegan Sun. Tribal casinos located in the eastern United States generated roughly $3.8 billion in FY02. Those located in the Central United States recorded gross revenues of approximately $5.9 billion, while those located in the Western United States generated close to $4.8 billion. Most of the revenues generated in the Indian gaming industry are from Indian casinos located in, or near, large metropolitan areas. Currently, 12% of Indian gaming establishments generate 65% of Indian gaming revenues. Indian gaming operations located in the populous areas of the West Coast (primarily California) represent the fastest growing sector of the Indian gaming industry. As suggested by the above figures, the vast majority of tribal casinos are much less financially successful, particularly those in the midwest and great plains. Many tribes see this limited financial success as being tempered by decreases in reservation unemployment and poverty rates, although socioeconomic deficits remain.

It is important to note that currently there are 562 federally recognized tribes in the United States, not all of which have chosen to game. However, it is safe to assume that the tribal gaming industry will continue to grow in the near term, as new casino and resort developments are built by tribes and America's general passion for opportunities to gamble (Las Vegas, poker tours, Internet, etc.), continues to flourish. There are currently a number of lawsuits pending which challenge the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act on constitutional grounds (see e.g. Warren v. United States)

The Indian Gaming Working Group

In June 2004, in an effort to identify and direct resources to Indian gaming matters, the FBI and NIGC created the IGWG. The IGWG's purpose is to identify resources to address the most pressing criminal violations in the area of Indian gaming. This group consists of representatives from a variety of FBI subprograms (i.e. Economic Crimes Unit, Money Laundering Unit, LCN/Organized Crime Unit, Asian Organized Crime Unit, Public Corruption/Government Fraud Unit, Cryptographic Racketeering Analysis Unit, and Indian Country Special Jurisdiction Unit) and other federal agencies, which include Department of Interior Office of Inspector General (DOI-OIG), NIGC, Internal Revenue Service Tribal Government Section (IRS-TGS), Department of Treasure Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FINCEN), Department of Justice (DOJ), and Bureau of Indian Affairs Office of Law Enforcement Services (BIA-OLES). The IGWG meets monthly to review Indian gaming cases deemed to have a significant impact on the Indian gaming industry. As a result of these meetings, several investigations have been initiated and the IGWG, through its member agencies, has provided financial resources, travel funds, liaison assistance, personnel resources, coordination assistance and consultation.

The IGWG works in the following manner:

  1. If suspected criminal activities are taking place in the Indian gaming industry and the interested office/agency does not have adequate resources to investigate this matter, the office/agency contacts the Indian Country Special Jurisdiction Unit, FBIHQ, at 202-324-3666. This contact may come from the FBI or an outside source or agency.
  2. A small group of IGWG members will convene to determine if the alleged criminal violation is a matter of "national importance" in its effect(s) on the Indian gaming industry. If so, the IGWG will invite representatives from the affected FBI division, other federal agencies (if appropriate), the affected United States Attorney's office, and IGWG member agencies to meet and further review the case.
  3. During this review, the agency eliciting the support of the IGWG will make a case presentation. Following a full review, the IGWG will assist the requesting office/agency to identify and obtain resources to assist in the investigation.
  4. Throughout the investigation, the IGWG will assist by providing "experts" to assist in the investigation; allocating special funding (i.e. facilitating TDY travel, Title III support, special forensic examination, etc.); conducting liaison with other federal agencies; facilitating the establishment of Indian gaming task forces, and/or providing consultation.

In order to properly detect the presence of illegal activity in the Indian gaming industry law enforcement offices with jurisdiction in Indian gaming violations should:

  1. Identify the Indian gaming establishments in their territory.
  2. Establish appropriate liaison with Tribal Gaming Commission (TGC) members, State Gaming Commission Representatives, State Gaming Regulatory Agency Representatives, and Casino Security Personnel.
  3. Establish liaison with representatives from the NIGC and regional Indian gaming intelligence committees. Both will provide valuable information on scams, allegations of criminal wrongdoing, and other patterns of illegal activity.
  4. Make proactive attempts during crime surveys to identify criminal activity in Indian gaming establishments.
  5. Send investigators and financial analysts to training which provides them with the knowledge and skills they need to effectively investigate criminal activity in Indian gaming establishments.

References

  • Wilkinson, Charles. Blood Struggle: The Rise of Modern Indian Nations. 1st. New York, NY: W.W. Norton & Company Ltd., 2005. ISBN 0393051498

Notes

  1. ^ "A big casino bet" San Francisco Chronicle (17 May 2006)
  2. ^ Wilkinson, Charles. Blood Struggle: The Rise of Modern Indian Nations. 1st. New York, NY: W.W. Norton & Company Ltd., 2005.329.
  3. ^ Wilkinson, Charles. Blood Struggle: The Rise of Modern Indian Nations. 1st. New York, NY: W.W. Norton & Company Ltd., 2005.331.
  4. ^ Wilkinson, Charles. Blood Struggle: The Rise of Modern Indian Nations. 1st. New York, NY: W.W. Norton & Company Ltd., 2005.333.
  5. ^ Wilkinson, Charles. Blood Struggle: The Rise of Modern Indian Nations. 1st. New York, NY: W.W. Norton & Company Ltd., 2005.332.
  6. ^ Wilkinson, Charles. Blood Struggle: The Rise of Modern Indian Nations. 1st. New York, NY: W.W. Norton & Company Ltd., 2005.332.
  7. ^ Wilkinson, Charles. Blood Struggle: The Rise of Modern Indian Nations. 1st. New York, NY: W.W. Norton & Company Ltd., 2005.335.
  8. ^ Wilkinson, Charles. Blood Struggle: The Rise of Modern Indian Nations. 1st. New York, NY: W.W. Norton & Company Ltd., 2005.336.
  9. ^ Wilkinson, Charles. Blood Struggle: The Rise of Modern Indian Nations. 1st. New York, NY: W.W. Norton & Company Ltd., 2005.335-36
  10. ^ Wilkinson, Charles. Blood Struggle: The Rise of Modern Indian Nations. 1st. New York, NY: W.W. Norton & Company Ltd., 2005.336.

Further reading

  • Steven Andrew Light and Kathryn R.L. Rand, "Indian Gaming and Tribal Sovereignty: The Casino Compromise," University Press of Kansas, 2005, hardcover, 240 pages, ISBN 0-7006-1406-0
  • Kathryn R.L. Rand and Steven Andrew Light, "Indian Gaming Law and Policy," Carolina Academic Press, 2006, hardcover, 306 pages, ISBN 1-59460-046-5
  • Brett Duval Fromson, Hitting the Jackpot: The Inside Story of the Richest Indian Tribe in History, Atlantic Monthly Press, September, 2003, hardcover, 320 pages, ISBN 0-87113-904-9; hardcover, Gale Group, February, 2004, hardcover, 366 pages, ISBN 0-7862-6211-7
  • Kevin K. Washburn, "The Legacy of Bryan v. Itasca County: How an Erroneous $147 County Tax Notice Helped Bring Tribes $200 Billion in Indian Gaming Revenue" 92 Minnesota Law Review 919 (2008), [1].

External links


v • d • e
Rights of Native Americans in the United States
Trials
Acts
Related
© jGames.co.uk 2007 (some content from Wikipedia under GDL ) !-- ValueClick Media 468x60 and 728x90 Banner CODE for jgames.co.uk -->
Your Ad Here