Here’s my piece in today’s Los Angeles Times’ Sunday commentary section on the current proposals to expand legalized Indian gambling in California. A bad idea.
It’s all about political cash — not social justice.
This entry was posted
on Sunday, March 11th, 2007 at 12:58 pm and is filed under Main.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
Both comments and pings are currently closed.
On your “Gaming California” screed, your opinion is as good as anyone’s on the issue of casinos.
Major fact-check deficiencies need to be addressed, however. You refer to Carol Schmidt as a “watchdog” when in fact she and “Standup” are shills for the Vegas Gaming industry as the state financial filings demonstrate beyond a junior reporters casual inquiry.
Indian Tribes are allowed to have more than one Casino becaise that is Federal Law (IGRA 1988) which pre-empts State law.
Gaming is basically entertainment and,like multiplexes and card casinos,is subject only by the vagaries of the market in reference to how many casinos are “needed”. The closing of theaters and the plight of card clubs are the workings of thye markets.
If anyone would ask. in a capitalistic environment, how many amusement parks, theaters or golf courses there should be, a rational assumption would be that the underlying philosophy of the author is a socialist ant-competitive bent.
The Agua Caliente Band has been characterized as a “bad actors’ from a collective bargaining point of view. but conflictinmg points of view on the subject are legitimate, even if one is slightly tainted. The Tribal Governments which can afford to be agnostic about workers rights and the other view that, inspite of Sovereign Immunity, tribes should hold a much higher moral ground on the issues of the dignity of work, a lining wage and benefits as well as the quality of life of the corporate family, shareholders and stakeholers alike.
The Majority of California Tribes seem to tilt to the latter moral rather the legalistic position, because historically, no one should be more sensitive to economic justice that the survivors of the Great American Holocost of 1700-1890 which took over twelve millionj lives by extermination and billions of square miles of land by theft.
The Agua Caliente resistance appears to have more to do with Republican philosophy than In dian Tradion or Sovereignty.
The criticism of the Governor’s role is not that he caved to the Indian Casino interests but that he took sides with the BIG donors againjst the smaller Tribes and to that extent he is a wanton hyprocrite.
By the by, All Indian tribes participate in gaming profits, some more that others. That your article appeared as opinion does not absolve you of being totally immune to facts.
If you have the b***s, print the above in its entirety.
My first election was in 1998. I believe there was a gaming initiative on the ballot. I reasoned as follows: “We stole their land. The least we can do is give them casinos. They ought to be free and independent sovereign nations. Who are we to regulate them in any way?” I know there is today a very thick web of regulation in which Federal and State laws affect Indian reservations. But I disagree that this state of affairs should persist. The basic idea is that they were here first, their polities ought to be recognized as free and subject to no higher power.
All your points about the corruption associated with Indian gaming and the California legislature are well taken. And I am also aware of tribal casinos failing to meet even the most minimal standards for wages, working conditions, etc. I consider these to be deplorable states of affairs.
But how do you refute this basic point: that the Indians ought to have whatever can do them any good? Let the tribes work out the concentration of casino wealth amongst themselves. After stealing their land, repressing their culture, eliminating their language and livelihoods… it looks like they found something that works. So let them have it. Hands off.
I think I’m not the only ordinary voter type person who feels this way.
Michael: here’s the easiest answer to ur question. The casinos DON’T benefit more than 90% of Native Americans. They benefit some tribes and mostly their leadership. These same gambling tribes are the MOST AGGRESSIVE in blocking other tribes from entering the casino business. Many of the casino operations are corrupt, some have become blurred with organized crime, and their specials status allows them to skirt labor and environmental law as well as much civil liability. In addition, this form of “economic development” is destined to eradicate much of the native culture. Those who do benefit from the casinos get huge monthly checks mailed to them — and I mean huge. The move from poverty to instant wealth ripped at the social and family fabric — many of the reservations are suffering an educational crisis as the kids see no reason to go to school when they are guaranteed a couple hundred grand a year for life.
Finally, excessive legalized gambling is bad for everyone else. Communities are negatively impacted and the tribes have no responsibility to mitigate. Is that enough?
There is simply no basis in fact that “”they benefit some tribes and mostly their leadership”.
Provide one scintilla of fact for that statement. Every tribe is guaranteed at least a million dollars from gaming in California (see 1999 State Compact). Their special status is called sovereign immunity. They do no more nor no less than States.
There is no doubt that sudden wealth is often deleterious, that’s why the Robber Barons of this country created “spendthrift” Trusts. Generally, this quick money phenomenon dissipates after two generations.
There are more Indian college graduates today than at any point in history (U.S. Department of Education, 2006).
MANY TRIBES HAVE NO PER CAPITA but use casino money only for economic diversification, health, education and senior benefits. Why did this escape your broad tainted brush?
Your last generalizaion ” excessive gambling is bad for everone else”. With what chutzpah do you arrogate the right to determine what is excessive? As a matter of fact, with the exception of human virtue, almost anything that is excessive is bad…but the world generally waits for objective standards to be able to determine what is moderate.
“Many casino operations are corrupt”? Give any law enforcement evidence of this. Organized crime is generally a White phenomenon…it invaded Vegas, the movie industry, media ownership, banking and United States politics at the highest levels.
Your demonstrate that it is possbile to be an American liberal and still harbor virulent racist infections. Is that enough?
March 11th, 2007 at 1:05 pm
Just jealous that they won’t comp you?
March 11th, 2007 at 2:54 pm
On your “Gaming California” screed, your opinion is as good as anyone’s on the issue of casinos.
Major fact-check deficiencies need to be addressed, however. You refer to Carol Schmidt as a “watchdog” when in fact she and “Standup” are shills for the Vegas Gaming industry as the state financial filings demonstrate beyond a junior reporters casual inquiry.
Indian Tribes are allowed to have more than one Casino becaise that is Federal Law (IGRA 1988) which pre-empts State law.
Gaming is basically entertainment and,like multiplexes and card casinos,is subject only by the vagaries of the market in reference to how many casinos are “needed”. The closing of theaters and the plight of card clubs are the workings of thye markets.
If anyone would ask. in a capitalistic environment, how many amusement parks, theaters or golf courses there should be, a rational assumption would be that the underlying philosophy of the author is a socialist ant-competitive bent.
The Agua Caliente Band has been characterized as a “bad actors’ from a collective bargaining point of view. but conflictinmg points of view on the subject are legitimate, even if one is slightly tainted. The Tribal Governments which can afford to be agnostic about workers rights and the other view that, inspite of Sovereign Immunity, tribes should hold a much higher moral ground on the issues of the dignity of work, a lining wage and benefits as well as the quality of life of the corporate family, shareholders and stakeholers alike.
The Majority of California Tribes seem to tilt to the latter moral rather the legalistic position, because historically, no one should be more sensitive to economic justice that the survivors of the Great American Holocost of 1700-1890 which took over twelve millionj lives by extermination and billions of square miles of land by theft.
The Agua Caliente resistance appears to have more to do with Republican philosophy than In dian Tradion or Sovereignty.
The criticism of the Governor’s role is not that he caved to the Indian Casino interests but that he took sides with the BIG donors againjst the smaller Tribes and to that extent he is a wanton hyprocrite.
By the by, All Indian tribes participate in gaming profits, some more that others. That your article appeared as opinion does not absolve you of being totally immune to facts.
If you have the b***s, print the above in its entirety.
March 11th, 2007 at 2:57 pm
Please correct obvious typos in my previous comment
March 11th, 2007 at 3:02 pm
In Woody’s World we would have no gambling–period. Once you open that door, there’s no shutting it and it just allows more and more in.
March 12th, 2007 at 9:18 am
Ask your GOP friends (Frank Fahrenkoff, Haley arbour) who shill for the “Gaming Industry” to do that Woody.
March 12th, 2007 at 4:38 pm
My first election was in 1998. I believe there was a gaming initiative on the ballot. I reasoned as follows: “We stole their land. The least we can do is give them casinos. They ought to be free and independent sovereign nations. Who are we to regulate them in any way?” I know there is today a very thick web of regulation in which Federal and State laws affect Indian reservations. But I disagree that this state of affairs should persist. The basic idea is that they were here first, their polities ought to be recognized as free and subject to no higher power.
All your points about the corruption associated with Indian gaming and the California legislature are well taken. And I am also aware of tribal casinos failing to meet even the most minimal standards for wages, working conditions, etc. I consider these to be deplorable states of affairs.
But how do you refute this basic point: that the Indians ought to have whatever can do them any good? Let the tribes work out the concentration of casino wealth amongst themselves. After stealing their land, repressing their culture, eliminating their language and livelihoods… it looks like they found something that works. So let them have it. Hands off.
I think I’m not the only ordinary voter type person who feels this way.
March 12th, 2007 at 9:27 pm
Michael: here’s the easiest answer to ur question. The casinos DON’T benefit more than 90% of Native Americans. They benefit some tribes and mostly their leadership. These same gambling tribes are the MOST AGGRESSIVE in blocking other tribes from entering the casino business. Many of the casino operations are corrupt, some have become blurred with organized crime, and their specials status allows them to skirt labor and environmental law as well as much civil liability. In addition, this form of “economic development” is destined to eradicate much of the native culture. Those who do benefit from the casinos get huge monthly checks mailed to them — and I mean huge. The move from poverty to instant wealth ripped at the social and family fabric — many of the reservations are suffering an educational crisis as the kids see no reason to go to school when they are guaranteed a couple hundred grand a year for life.
Finally, excessive legalized gambling is bad for everyone else. Communities are negatively impacted and the tribes have no responsibility to mitigate. Is that enough?
March 13th, 2007 at 10:22 am
There is simply no basis in fact that “”they benefit some tribes and mostly their leadership”.
Provide one scintilla of fact for that statement. Every tribe is guaranteed at least a million dollars from gaming in California (see 1999 State Compact). Their special status is called sovereign immunity. They do no more nor no less than States.
There is no doubt that sudden wealth is often deleterious, that’s why the Robber Barons of this country created “spendthrift” Trusts. Generally, this quick money phenomenon dissipates after two generations.
There are more Indian college graduates today than at any point in history (U.S. Department of Education, 2006).
MANY TRIBES HAVE NO PER CAPITA but use casino money only for economic diversification, health, education and senior benefits. Why did this escape your broad tainted brush?
Your last generalizaion ” excessive gambling is bad for everone else”. With what chutzpah do you arrogate the right to determine what is excessive? As a matter of fact, with the exception of human virtue, almost anything that is excessive is bad…but the world generally waits for objective standards to be able to determine what is moderate.
“Many casino operations are corrupt”? Give any law enforcement evidence of this. Organized crime is generally a White phenomenon…it invaded Vegas, the movie industry, media ownership, banking and United States politics at the highest levels.
Your demonstrate that it is possbile to be an American liberal and still harbor virulent racist infections. Is that enough?
August 2nd, 2007 at 7:22 am
hi…
Agree…