Posted on 02/04/2008 10:04:21 AM PST by NormsRevenge
SACRAMENTO – When Californians vote on Indian gambling agreements tomorrow, much more than the fate of those four deals may be hanging in the balance.
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who negotiated the compacts, disclosed in recent days that he wants to approve a lot more tribal gaming before he leaves office in three years.
“I'm interested in one thing, and one thing only, that . . . the Indian gaming tribes pay their fair share, and . . . that we in California get the money, because we need the money,” Schwarzenegger said last week.
Schwarzenegger said he expects future agreements to more than double the $9 billion the four agreements are projected to pay the state over the next two decades.
“When we are finished with all the negotiations, with all the tribes – because we're not finished yet – it will be approximately $22 billion that we will get over the next 20 years,” said Schwarzenegger, who provided no further details. “That is more than a billion dollars a year. With that, we can educate a lot of kids and pay a lot of police officers and firefighters.”
The results of the vote could signal how much more Las Vegas-style gambling may be welcome in a state where Indian casinos have quickly become a $7 billion industry.
“If these four referenda pass, particularly by a strong margin, it's a signal to the governor and the tribes that the public's willing to accept additional levels of gaming in the state,” said Dan Schnur, a political consultant who has worked for tribes and former Gov. Pete Wilson.
“But if they go down, that's a cautionary signal that the governor is going to have to take very seriously.”
Propositions 94, 95, 96 and 97 would ratify new compacts for four of the state's wealthiest and most powerful tribes – the Sycuan band of El Cajon, Pechanga of Temecula, Morongo of Banning and Agua Caliente of Palm Springs.
The compacts authorize up to 17,000 more slot machines, with as many as 7,500 each for Pechanga and Morongo and 5,000 each for Sycuan and Agua Caliente. The four now are limited to 2,000 slots each.
In exchange, the tribes agreed to stronger environmental, patron and employee protections, and to pay a larger share of slot revenues to the state.
Support for the compacts and for the expansion of gambling has grown as the tribes pushing the agreements poured nearly $110 million into their campaign, outspending opponents by a 3-to-1 ratio.
Public opinion data gathered by the Field Poll appears to back that up. In September 2006, a Field Poll survey found 50 percent of Californians generally opposed gambling expansion, with 39 percent in support. Now a majority of Californians – 44 percent to 38 percent – say they support gambling expansion, the latest Field Poll survey found.
“The ad campaign has moved those numbers,” said Field Poll director Mark DiCamillo.
DiCamillo said his surveys show “there is a direct correlation between a voter's fundamental opinion about the idea of expanding Indian gaming in California and their views on the four propositions.”
Opposition has been financed by two big gaming tribes, Pala of San Diego County and United Auburn of suburban Sacramento, a casino workers union and the owner of two major horse racetracks. Among the objections they have raised is that the compacts will encourage expansion.
It is unknown where the additional gaming to which the governor alluded may occur. Schwarzenegger did not say and his administration routinely refuses to discuss compact negotiations.
Neither Aaron McLear, the governor's press secretary, nor the governor's Department of Finance could identify the source of the $22 billion estimate.
“What he's referring to is the potential amount that's estimated could come to the state, based on what the market may be and the number of tribes,” McLear said.
It is widely believed that Schwarzenegger and his attorneys have been in talks with at least two tribes hoping to build large new casinos near Shingle Springs and Rohnert Park in Northern California. Other tribes also may be preparing to renegotiate their existing deals.
While the administration has not announced any new compacts in the 18 months that four have been pending, McLear said negotiations were not deferred until after tomorrow's vote. Nor is the outcome likely to affect the administration's negotiating posture, he said.
“This election doesn't have any bearing on the governor's belief that these compacts are important to the state,” McLear said.
Schwarzenegger, facing a $14.5 billion budget shortfall, has been desperately seeking new sources of revenue, and is counting on expanded gaming to be one of them.
Depending on tomorrow's results, any new deals could prove difficult to move through the Legislature, which must ratify compacts.
“I think the governor, the Legislature, the tribes, everybody has to look at the changing political climate,” said Assemblyman Alberto Torrico, a Fremont Democrat who was at the table during months of difficult talks with the tribes.
“That means, for all of us, if we want to respect the will of California voters, we have to consider the results of these initiatives very carefully.”
Governors in the past, including Schwarzenegger, have heeded public sentiment registered at the ballot box.
In 1998, Gov. Gray Davis agreed to negotiate the first round of compacts after the overwhelming passage of Proposition 5, a landmark tribal gaming initiative.
Even though the California Supreme Court declared the 1998 measure unconstitutional, Davis knew the public was poised to deliver another strong vote for Indian casinos, if necessary.
Schwarzenegger stopped offering compacts with unlimited slots not long after voters resoundingly rejected Proposition 70 in November 2004. The tribal-backed initiative would have given Indian casinos unlimited gaming.
No matter who wins tomorrow, some tribes on the sidelines fear they will be losers.
Leaders of the Rincon band, which operates a casino-resort in North County, say the pending deals are simply too expensive for most tribes.
“If we wake up on Feb. 6 and these compacts are approved, we expect Schwarzenegger to view it as a mandate to try to extract as much blood as possible from every tribe that comes to his office,” said Scott Crowell, Rincon's attorney.
“If we wake up on Feb. 6 and the compacts have lost, then the message is going to be the public doesn't support Indian gaming anymore.”
If we are trying to beat Vegas..then we need to let them have legal prostitution as well. Also,,I think the entertainers who are non-resident get some tax break to get big names.
Might as well go whole hog. This is afterall..a tax on those who are bad at math(democRats).
The GOP also micht just as well get a share of the contributions as well.
Anyone in California weigh in on this? I usually vote NO on props unless they can convince me to vote yes. I haven’t been convinced yet ...
Tom McClintock, the PREMIER and seems one of the few remaining completely conservative (fiscal, moral, defense, etc) politicians in California politics has endorsed the gaming initiatives.
This should be all anyone needs to know.
All he endorsed was the fact that they may bring in revenue to the state - that, has mis-spent all the money so far.
Vote No on the four measures.
I’m going to vote no. There are too many casinos around CA already, I don’t like gambling expansion, and I especially don’t like gambling expansions for certain groups only.
If Native Americans can have casinos in CA, then everyone should be able to. But I don’t think an expansion of gambling is what our culture needs anyway.
Tom (completely conservative) McClintock campaigned for the Austrian for heaven's sake and now he's promoting gambling to pay for outsized spending instead of reducing spending.
You've got to be kidding.
No No No No No and No.. Um.. How many is that? ;-)
Better to keep those tax revenues in CA than send them to Nev.
1986 - Indian Spokesman: "Pass these gambling propositions and we'll become self-supporting"
1988 - Indian Spokesman: "Pass these gambling propositions and we'll become self-supporting"
1990 - Indian Spokesman: "Pass these gambling propositions and we'll become self-supporting"
1992 - Indian Spokesman: "Pass these gambling propositions and we'll become self-supporting"
1994 - Indian Spokesman: "Pass these gambling propositions and we'll become self-supporting"
1996 - Indian Spokesman: "Pass these gambling propositions and we'll become self-supporting"
1998 - Indian Spokesman: "Pass these gambling propositions and we'll become self-supporting"
2000 - Indian Spokesman: "Pass these gambling propositions and we'll become self-supporting"
2002 - Indian Spokesman: "Pass these gambling propositions and we'll become self-supporting"
2004 - Indian Spokesman: "Pass these gambling propositions and we'll become self-supporting"
2006 - Indian Spokesman: "Pass these gambling propositions and we'll become self-supporting"
2008 - Indian Spokesman: "Pass these gambling propositions and we'll become self-supporting"
at least it seems that way.
Keep in mind that Tom has taken campaign contributions from the tribes.
Someone needs to remind Arnold of this debate...
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/politics/july-dec03/recall_9-25.html
CALIFORNIA RECALL
September 25, 2003
ARONLD SCHWARZENEGGER: “Other states require revenue from Indian gaming, but not us.”
Nevada-style slot machines allowed
Current If Passed
Prop 94 (Pechanga) 2,000 7,500
Prop 95 (Morongo) 2,000 7,500
Prop 96 (Sycuan) 2,000 5,000
Prop 97 (Agua Calientes) 2,000 5,000
----- ------
Total 8,000 25,000
Percent Increase 212%
Paid to State ($ in millions)*
Current If Passed (at least)**
Prop 94 (Pechanga) $29.0 $44.5
Prop 95 (Morongo) 29.0 38.7
Prop 96 (Sycuan) 5.0 23.0
Prop 97 (Agua Calientes) 13.0 25.4
----- ------
Total $76.0 $131.6
Percent Increase 73%
*Payments to state: It is all sheep need to know, perhaps.
Thankfully, there are a whole lot of smart folks who, in this case, adamantly disagree with Senator McClintock and will be voting NO!, NO!, NO! and NO!
GOP wants more money coming into the state, that’s why they are for it.
hahah, a good response — list of dates and ads. hahah. Thanks all for your input.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.