And now:Ish <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: http://www.indiancountry.com/Natl31.HTML Panel: Halt gaming spread Indian gaming appears to be subjected to unfair scrutiny By David Melmer Today staff Northern Plains Bureau SEATTLE, Wash. - A national gaming study may have profound effects on Indian gaming once Congress gets the final report. Gaming tribes from across the country made their last pitch during the final hearing of the National Gaming Impact Study Commission here Jan. 7. Tribal officials made an 11th-hour appeal to convince the subcommittee on Indian gaming that charges of inaccuracies and misstatements about regulation of Indian gaming were false. Congress funded a study and formed the committee to look at the growth of gaming across the nation. Indian gaming is only one part of the picture, but is specifically mentioned in the law that established the study. Cautious optimism mixed with fear from tribal and gaming officials followed a day-long marathon of testimony from more than 30 tribal gaming officials, consultants, attorneys and vendors who presented facts accompanied by mountains of data to commissioners. "We have to get back to the virtues. If you make gaming easy, everyone will do it," said Paul H. Moore, a physician and chairman of the subcommittee, who compared casinos to nursing homes. "Proliferation of nursing homes would break America. "Anything we recommend will not be a punishment to you. It will be for the betterment of all Americans," he told the gathering. "We have to make sure this is the type of business we want and determine if there is a saturation point." The entire nine-member commission will have input into the final report that covers the impact of all gaming across the country, not specifically Indian gaming. However, from statements and actions at the final hearing, it would be difficult to argue that Indian gaming was not singled out and placed under a microscope. Diligent preparation and testimony on regulation for this final hearing made an impact. Three of the commissioners were convinced, with reservations, that for the most part Indian gaming is regulated. Tribal gaming officials said they had to come into this hearing with reams of data to prove their point about regulation. One commissioner remained a doubter. William A. Bible, former chairman of the Nevada Gaming Control Board, was not convinced that tribal gaming is properly regulated. He said one of his concerns was that regulation is a patchwork quilt across the nation with some tribes doing a good job while others are lax."I am concerned that some tribes are conducting Class III gaming without a compact." Regulation became the focus of most testimony. Even information on other aspects of gaming usually was proceeded by review of a specific casino's regulatory operation. During and following a similar hearing in Las Vegas, Nev., Gov. Bill Miller and Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., repeatedly criticized Indian gaming as an unregulated, untaxed industry. Their comments prompted the request by Indian gaming officials and tribal leaders for another hearing before the Indian subcommittee to clear up misunderstandings. "A case has been made that Indian gaming is regulated and that assets are pledged for regulation and oversight. I regret I had a disagreement with Gov. Miller and the Nevada Congressional delegation. They did not have the information we had," said Robert Loescher, Tlingit, president and CEO of Sealaska Corp. and Goldbelt Inc. He said he is convinced tribal leaders want to preserve the integrity of gaming. "Our regulation requirements are more stringent and complex to provide integrity in gaming, which is the key. If we didn't, the customers wouldn't come," said Rich Hill, president of National Indian Gaming Association. "Tribes have dedicated enormous resources to regulation." Hill told the subcommittee that internal control standards were exceeded. "It was unfortunate to hear remarks by Gov. Miller," he said. Sharon House, Oneida Tribe of Wisconsin Gaming Commission and author of NIGA's minimum regulatory standards, said the state of Wisconsin required that new compacts with the tribes incorporate minimum standards established by NIGA. "It took us two years to regulate - it took (Nevada) 30 or 40 years," House said. "Nevada's regulation is driven by taxation money. Indian gaming is survival driven. It doesn't serve the same purpose as commercial gaming." Regulation isn't the only misconception or problem facing Indian gaming in the final report. Chairman Moore said work must be done on compacts. He wants wording that doesn't favor either party. "When I make a deal, I want it so good we'll make another. "We are getting down to the nitty gritty. This whole commission is not studying Indians, we are dancing around everything. I've learned a lot," Moore said. A major sticking point with commissioners was revenue. Indian casinos do not make public the details of net revenues, yet the commissioners felt they should. All the members asked Indian tribes to reveal revenues and payouts, especially, Moore said, "to each tribal member." Commissioners said financial information should be in the final report, but it has been difficult to acquire the data. Moore said that accounting would give Indian gaming more credibility. He added that with one phone call, he received information about payouts from a Las Vegas casino. The tribes were not budging. "Tribes have no reason to trust the outside," House said. "It's been used against us, it's difficult. We may be doing ourselves a disservice." "There are poor tribes in this country that are poorly funded or not funded," said Harris Teo, council member, Yakima Indian Nation. "For this information to get out ... (Sen. Slade) Gorton (R-Wash.) wants this information to use against tribes." On a positive side, commissioners were impressed with the economic impact casino revenues provided to reservations for infrastructure, health care, education and other social and governmental projects. Commissioner Loescher said he thought the tribes were doing better with their revenues than states or any commercial gaming operation. Commissioner Wilhelm didn't go that far, but admitted that Indian gaming revenues were used as well as those in Nevada and elsewhere. Commissioners agreed testimony was informative though not always congenial. Some testimony took on adversarial overtones when commissioners were rebuked for either not visiting tribal and gaming sites or for bringing a biased viewpoint of gaming to the commission. S. Timothy Wapato, former executive director of the National Indian Gaming Association, leveled a barrage of criticism at the committee early in the day. He said the commission was not authorized or empowered to be a fact-finding body on Indian issues. "Congress does that," he said. He also reminded commissioners that it was Indian tribes which had input into legislation that brought the commission to reality. He said nine changes were recommended by the tribes to make the commission fair, objective and unbiased. "As we've gone through the two years of the commission, we've been somewhat disappointed. And I was really disappointed today when Chairman Moore indicated that when the federal Indian Gaming Regulatory Act was passed it gave the tribes the right to gamble. That act gave nothing to the tribes. "That act took away from the tribes. The Supreme Court in the Cabazon case indicated Indian tribes had the right to conduct gaming unrestricted by state law. IGRA required states and tribes to negotiate compacts. It was a limitation, not granting a gift. This commission has to understand that, and apparently doesn't yet, because we keep hearing these statements from individual commissioners and keep seeing official documents and so we think that has to be fully understood. "I don't see how an unbiased report can be written," Wapato said. Commissioners' absence from tribal casinos and reservations to gather data was another criticism leveled at the study. The subcommittee members admitted they spent time at the Foxwoods Casino owned by the Mashantucket Pequots, the largest casino of its kind in the country. Gaming and tribal officials told the commissioners they would have received a truer picture of what Indian gaming meant to tribal members, the reservations and the regions in which they were located, had they visited smaller casinos. Wilhelm said commissioners asked for guidance, but received no reply. Letters were sent to the commission and a plan was laid out for commissioners, "but they did not respond," Hill said. Heaviest criticism of the commission and its intent centers on individual commissioners. Indian gaming representatives argue that because of backgrounds and affiliations with certain organizations some members cannot be objective and do, in fact, carry with them an anti-gaming agenda. "We do not have a personal agenda," Chairman Moore said. To make a point, Wapato singled out Commissioner John W. Wilhelm, general secretary-treasurer for the Hotel Employees and Restaurant Employees International Union in Las Vegas, as one person with a personal agenda. Wilhelm's union was an active opponent of California's Prop 5, which was favorable to Indian gaming. His union filed a friend of the court brief with anti-Prop 5 forces in litigation to test the proposition's constitutionality. Wapato said Wilhelm should disqualify himself from the commission. Jerry Levine, attorney representing various tribes, agreed and told the commission Wilhelm was not fit to sit as a commissioner. Wilhelm responded in a tense exchange, saying Levine was not accurate. Levine countered, telling the commission his integrity was impugned by Wilhelm. He added he could back up any of his comments with documentation. "Wapato said it was not appropriate for me to be on the commission. I was appointed to represent the interest of gaming employees," Wilhelm said. He termed Levine's and Wapato's statements as inappropriate. <<END EXCERPT &&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&& Tsonkwadiyonrat (We are ONE Spirit) Unenh onhwa' Awayaton http://www.tdi.net/ishgooda/ &&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
