Deron Marquez: Indian gaming won't last forever

Tuesday, July 3, 2007  

"Someday, it may be said that fading to completion was inevitable. In 1856, Indian Affairs Commissioner Alfred Cummings foresaw the treaty making process as a direct relationship to slowly erode the political fabric known as “Tribe.” The time and terrain were vastly different then and tribal leaders acted to secure the “people;” securing their existence, their way of life, physically and spiritually and by executing treaties, attempting to hold off encroachment, both geographical and political. Treaties are a composition of compromises between two separate governmental parties and the complex story of the U.S.–Tribal treaty life is well documented. Tribes agreed to and executed their provisions only to have the U.S. ignore or refuse to fulfill their end of the deal.

As of late, by a federal act, tribes are forced to negotiate new forms of treaties with state governments. Under the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA), discussions between the two governments are supposed to center around a “Class III” scope; scope of gambling activity (Las Vegas style games) and scope of regulation (of Class III). The federal government, at the request of state governments, opened this process for new treaties (called “compacts”) that once held to the limits stated above, but recent compacts include labor provisions, taxation of gaming activity, state oversight beyond gaming activities, mandatory waiver of sovereignty and the list goes on. Like before, tribal leaders agreed to such language as means to secure their people and this time, their Tribal Nation. It must be stated that some compacts hold true to the proper form intended by the IGRA, but those are too few.

The language of these new treaties are to be “negotiated” by heads of states, but are mostly handled by attorneys representing the heads. Typically, negotiations are dictations and the elected leaders rarely engage during dictation. In some cases, the agreed upon language is sent to the state legislative branch for approval, meaning a “for” or “against” vote. Until now, ratification of existing compacts was their only activity, if they were involved at all. "

Get the Story:
Deron Marquez: Someday Fading Inevitable (Pechanga.net 7/3)