Tony Carnelli
Staff Writer
Much has been publicized about Propositions 68 and 70, which involve Native American-run casinos and have been proposed to provide solutions to the state’s budget problems.
Under federal law, California Indian tribes are considered to be sovereign nations. For that reason, tribes are not required to pay most federal, state or local taxes. The federal law allows California tribes to conduct gambling and have casinos on Indian land. However, Propositions 68 and 70 will be placed on California’s ballot in hopes to reduce California’s ongoing budget problems in exchange for more casinos and more taxes from Indian tribes. Yet, not everyone is in support of these propositions.
According to the attorney general, Proposition 68 allows for the governor to tax Indian tribes 25 percent of their gambling revenues. In addition, the proposition would also authorize 16 non-tribal racetracks and there would also be new gambling establishments that could operate up to 30,000 slot machines and currently banned games such as craps. Also, 33 percent of the net revenues would go toward funding government public safety and regulatory programs. Advocates in support of Proposition 68 are claiming that Native Americans should pay their fair share.
However, not all Native American tribe members in California agree.
Humboldt State University Native American Studies Chairman Dr. Joseph Giovannetti said the propositions are attacks against all Indians because they undermine tribal sovereignty. He also said he doesn’t think Native Americans owe the state anything.
“States have never been friends of Indians, they have actually been known to be an enemy of tribes and tribal interests,” Giovanetti said. “Arnold’s attitude that Indians need to pay their fair share is an example of the racist rhetoric.”
Giovannetti also said Proposition 70 could have a negative effect on local economies.
“I think the tribes prefer Proposition 70,” Giovanetti said. “It’s lesser of the two evils, but it also erodes, or undermines tribal sovereignty. Indians don’t have to pay taxes to the state, but in this proposition they would pay 8.84 percent of their gaming revenue.”
Despite the conflicts between advocates for and against Proposition 70, Proposition 68 will be less significant on California’s ballot. According to the Associated Press, backers of Proposition 68 dropped their campaign.
Proposition 70 has a few key differences from 68. First of all, if Proposition 70 passed, tribes would be granted exclusive gaming rights, and there would be no limits on the number of gambling machines casinos could have or types of games that could be played on tribal land. Tribes would also contribute gaming income that would be the same as the current corporate tax, which is 8.84 percent. The main supporter of Proposition 70 is the Agua Caliente Indian Band of Cahullia Indians. Tribe Chairman Richard Milanovich said his tribe only wants other tribes to stand up for what is fair and that since Native American tribes are now successfully making profit they should give back to the state.
Lead Consultant for Proposition 70, Gene Raper said Schwarzenegger has different motivations for voting no against Proposition 70. He explained that since the size of Indian tribe casinos is currently limited, Proposition 70 will increase the tribes’ ability to expand gambling establishment and thus, they will only have to contribute little money to the state. Raper also was optimistic about how voting yes on Proposition 70 could have a positive affect on California’s economy.
“Any area where there is a casino has a large advantage because it is the area’s largest economic engine. More Indian casinos will help the economy greatly.”
10-28-2004