And now:Ish <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
link provided by Mary M..thanks,Ish
Here's chance to re-evaluate Santee
casino
http://www.journalstar.com/stories/edd/stox
Hope flickered briefly that new federal rules might
permit the Santee Sioux Tribe to win a legal right to
operate its casino in northeastern Nebraska.
That hope is dimming. Preliminary comment from
Nebraska officials reveal no bending of the state's
intransigent attitude against the casino. The new federal
rules, which take effect May 12, would allow Interior
Secretary Bruce Babbit to act as a final judge in settling
disputes between states and tribes.
But U.S. Attorney Tom Monaghan said last week that
the rule would not apply in Nebraska. State officials
contend that because casino gambling is not offered
elsewhere in Nebraska, the Santee have no right to
operate a casino on their reservation. The tribe
contends that Nebraska has refused to negotiate with
the tribe in good faith.
Legally, the tribe has lost every battle with federal and
state officials. The Santee faces a $3,000 fine for every
day the tribe continues to operate the casino.
The Journal Star recognizes the existence of court
ruling against the Santee's position. The Journal Star
also is no supporter of gambling. But we think the
Santee should be able to decide for themselves whether
or not they want a casino on their land as a matter of
tribal sovereignty.
The new federal rules could offer a graceful way for
state officials to soften their strict interpretation of
existing laws. Other states in much the same legal
situation as Nebraska -- Wisconsin, Michigan and
Connecticut are a few examples -- have found common
ground on which tribes and state officials negotiated
compacts for tribes to allow casinos on their own land.
Other avenues toward common ground are possible. In
California, for example, voters passed Proposition 5,
which gave legal status to Indian casinos that were
operating without state sanction within reservation
boundaries.
So far, however, Nebraska officials have taken a hard
line against the Ohiya Casino, which consisted of a few
second-hand video slots in a converted restaurant when
it opened in 1996.
This newspaper has long been bemused by the horror
with which state officials view the Ohiya casino, while
they promote the state's own forms of gambling like
scratch-off cards and lottery tickets. The state takes in
about $600 million a year from those forms of
gambling.
Those state-approved forms of gambling provide funds
for the environment and education. The casino
provides funds for an area where unemployment not
infrequently reaches 70 percent.
If it's permissible for the state to operate its own games
of chance, why shouldn't state officials work with the
Santee toward an agreement that would legalize games
at the Ohiya? The state is already in the gambling
business, it's just a question of where to draw the line.
We suggest it be at the border of the reservation.
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
Tsonkwadiyonrat (We are ONE Spirit)
Unenh onhwa' Awayaton
http://www.tdi.net/ishgooda/
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
