Gaming firm denies being responsible for anti-tribal amendment

Monday, July 11, 2016

Construction continues on the $950 million MGM Resorts International facility in Springfield, Massachusetts. Photo from MGM Springfield / Twitter

>
A non-Indian gaming company claims it wasn't responsible for an anti-tribal amendment that surfaced on Capitol Hill last month.

The language in question never made it into the S.2943, the National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 2017. But lawmakers are certain it was the work of MGM Resorts International, a non-Indian firm that generated about $9.8 billion in revenue in 2013

"It's pretty exceptional to try to solve a local issue in the defense authorization bill. So, we weren't going to let that amendment go anywhere," Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Connecticut), who helped stop the effort, told the Associated Press. "But it's clear that MGM is using every angle they can find to try to stop this project from going forward."

The provision was extremely convoluted but it was aimed at preventing the Mashantucket Pequot Tribal Nation and the Mohegan Tribe from opening a commercial casino in Connecticut. Through lawsuits, lobbying and other efforts, MGM has been clear about its desire to stop the two tribes from succeeding.

"MGM's shameless tactics are well-documented," Andrew Doba, a spokesman for the two tribes, told the AP. "They will say anything, do anything, spend anything to protect their bottom line. And if they're successful in Connecticut, more residents will find themselves in the unemployment line."

The two tribes also have been clear about their motivation for seeking a casino outside of the framework of the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act. They are worried about competition from MGM's $950 million commercial facility that's going up just across the state line in Springfield, Massachusetts.

The tribes are still looking at sites for the potential casino but hope to select a location by 2017. They will then ask the Connecticut Legislature to approve the project.

The MGM facility is expected to open in the fall of 2018. The tribes believe they can open their casino sooner.

Get the Story:
MGM Steps Up Opposition To Proposed Tribal Casino Project (AP 7/10)

An Opinion:
Our View: Desperate play on keno is paying off (The Norwich Bulletin 7/8)

Related Stories:
Connecticut tribes still working on plan for potential new casino (06/30)
Senate provision targeted tribes with commercial gaming plans (6/27)
Non-Indian gaming firm asks Congress to block new tribal casino (6/22)
Non-Indian gaming firm loses challenge to law for new tribal casino (6/24)
Non-Indian gaming firm asks Congress to block new tribal casino (6/22)
Connecticut tribes report increases from slot machine revenues (05/17)
Connecticut tribes delay decision on potential casino until 2017 (04/27)
Connecticut tribes still haven't selected a site for potential casino (4/22)
Fantasy sports bill in doubt due to impact on tribes in Connecticut (4/19)
Connecticut tribes report declines in revenue from slot machines (4/15)
Rodney Green: Tribal casino won't stop Connecticut's job losses (4/11)
Tribes in Connecticut see victory with defeat of casino study bill (03/18)
Tribes in Connecticut report increases in slot machine revenues (3/15)
Colin McEnroe: Schaghticoke Tribal Nation loses in big casino fight (3/14)
Connecticut tribes oppose further study of proposed third casino (3/10)
Connecticut tribes continue looking at sites for potential casino (02/24)
Connecticut tribes might face roadblock in plan for new casino (2/19)
Mashantucket Pequot Tribal Nation sees gaming revenue gains (2/12)
Tribes in Connecticut still working on process for potential casino (2/9)
Don Vaccaro: Connecticut tribes need another casino to compete (2/1)
Airport touts hotel as spot for new tribal casino in Connecticut (1/28)
Opinion: Connecticut puts too much focus on a new tribal casino (1/21)
Connecticut tribes see mixed results in slot machine revenues (1/15)
Site identified as potential location for tribal casino in Connecticut (1/6)
Tribes in Connecticut delay decision on host for potential casino (1/5)