BIA official promises policy on off-reservation gaming
Wednesday, June 30, 2004
As more and more tribes seek to establish gaming operations far away from
their existing reservations, the Bush administration continues to struggle
with the political and legal realities of the controversial practice.
At least a dozen tribes have off-reservation casino proposals pending before
the Bureau of Indian Affairs or the National Indian Gaming Commission while
countless others are asserting gaming rights hundreds of miles
away from their current locations, sometimes in other states, often in
connection with land claims.
Despite the growing trend, the Bush administration still hasn't developed
a policy on the issue, Aurene Martin, the second in command at the
BIA, said last week.
The subject came up at a hearing over legislation that would settle two tribal
claims for off-reservation casinos.
"While have initiated internal
discussions regarding this issue, we have not yet determined our position,"
Martin told the House Resources Committee on Thursday.
Earlier this year, Martin warned Indian legal scholars that members of
Congress might take the matter into their own hands. House Republicans
already inserted language in an appropriations bill warning against
off-reservation land acquisitions, and other lawmakers are considering
ways to stop tribes from opening casinos in their backyards.
These attempts are seen as detrimental to tribal rights but some Indian
Country advocates are also frustrated with the delays.
"Do you think the Congress should wait for the [Interior] department for a decision?"
Rep. Eni Faleomavaega (D-American Samoa) asked at the hearing.
"Or should we just zip it in an amendment and be done with it?"
So far, the administration has sent mixed signals when asked to enter
the debate. In Louisiana, the BIA denied the Jena Band of Choctaw Indians'
gaming compact with a warning that its proposed casino site
was far from its existing service area. In New York, the BIA let the
Seneca Nation's gaming deal go into effect even as Interior Secretary Gale
Norton said she was "extremely concerned" about the tribe's off-reservation
site.
But George Skibine, the BIA official in charge of gaming, surprised
many when he said his staff could find no legal basis to deny off-reservation
land acquisitions. At a Senate hearing in March, he testified that
"it would definitely be an economic benefit to tribes" to allow faraway casinos
in lucrative locations.
That reasoning conflicted with a legal opinion issued less than a week later
by attorneys at the NIGC. They wrote that a provision in federal law
"limits, not expands, the right to game" by
"disallow[ing] gaming on newly acquired lands far from the current prior
reservation." The ruling, on the status of the Wyandotte Nation's casino
in Kansas, is being challenged by the Oklahoma-based tribe.
In an interview following that March hearing, Skibine said there was "no
legislative history" on the subject. But last week, Rep. Dale Kildee
(D-Michigan), the co-chairman of the Congressional Native American Caucus,
said Congress foresaw occasions when tribes might obtain off-reservation
land. Kildee, however, opposes the land claim-casino bill due to objections
from other tribes.
Since taking over the White House more than three years ago, the Bush
administration has finalized just one off-reservation land acquisition
for three Ojibwe tribes in Wisconsin.
But the decision came way back in February 2001 and it was a holdover from the Clinton
era.
Later that year, former assistant secretary Neal McCaleb rescinded
regulations that would have helped guide the process. He also pulled
back another set of rules specifically tailored to off-reservation
acquisitions.
The administration is acting in other cases but only because
Congress has mandated the land acquisition for a specific
tribe. Once a rare practice, this
too has become commonplace as tribes and gaming interests seek
legislation -- often cloaked in
highly technical language -- favorable to their
casino projects.
The tactic of settling land claims for gaming rights is also
gaining favor. Leading the way is New York, whose Republican governor, George
Pataki, is dangling the promise of casinos in exchange for resolving
decades-long lawsuits. The deals also seek to address taxation,
jurisdiction and a host of other issues.
Elsewhere, tribes have used the threat of claims to push for gaming
rights too. The Cheyenne-Arapaho Tribes of Oklahoma have asked for
a casino in Colorado to settle a 56 million-acre claim there.
The Delaware Nation and the Delaware Tribe, both of Oklahoma,
have staked their eyes on Pennsylvania. And the Miami Nation of
Oklahoma has long tested the waters in Kansas and Illinois.
At last week's hearing,
Martin didn't give an indication on when a decision on a policy might be made.
But she said it would play an important role as more off-reservation gaming
proposals come down the line.
"Our discussion will address the issue as a global matter and will
hopefully provide a blueprint for us for our decisions in the future,"
she said.
Trending in News
1 Tribes rush to respond to new coronavirus emergency created by Trump administration
2 'At this rate the entire tribe will be extinct': Zuni Pueblo sees COVID-19 cases double as first death is confirmed
3 Arne Vainio: 'A great sickness has been visited upon us as human beings'
4 Arne Vainio: Zoongide'iwin is the Ojibwe word for courage
5 Cayuga Nation's division leads to a 'human rights catastrophe'
2 'At this rate the entire tribe will be extinct': Zuni Pueblo sees COVID-19 cases double as first death is confirmed
3 Arne Vainio: 'A great sickness has been visited upon us as human beings'
4 Arne Vainio: Zoongide'iwin is the Ojibwe word for courage
5 Cayuga Nation's division leads to a 'human rights catastrophe'