[vbmoneyspender]

My sentiments are with McClintock, but this is off the mark. Schwarzenegger is making a legitimate point that Indian gambling has become too powerful in state politics.

So are you suggesting that we tax them in order to reduce their influence? How much should they be taxed in order for their influence to be reduced to the point that you feel comfortable with them. And once you have started down that road, do you think talk radio hosts should be taxed because they have become very influential. Likewise, should rich people have their taxes increased because they can do the same thing as the Indian tribes, which is pay for independent advertising?

[tallhappy]

So are you suggesting that we tax them in order to reduce their influence?

Our champion's people say do not ask questions.

Logic, no.

[RGSpincich]

Whoever is the recipient of the benefits of affirmative action gaming laws should repay the taxpayers for the infrastructure that has been provided by the taxpayers. Those affirmative action law benders should also be barred from making unlimited independent expenditures in political races.

[KellyAdmirer]

Maybe they should, um, just be taxed like everyone else. ?

[Zevonismymuse]

How much should they be taxed in order for their influence to be reduced to the point that you feel comfortable with them.

How about if they are taxed the same percentage as those few gambling patrons who actually win in Indian Casinos; 40%?

There are 150 Chumash Indians in Santa Ynez, CA splitting the revenue from the Chumash Casino. Each of the 150 people splitting the pot receives approximately $50,000 tax free each month. Yep, you read right: $50,000 per month. They refuse to share the proceeds with the 7,500-9,000 Chumash decendants estimated to be living in California.

I spoke with an LA Times reporter who has been working on the story for the past three months. Apparently the Times is waiting until after the election to expose the malfeasance occuring at the Chumash Casino.

[GladesGuru]

Have you considered the Constitutional barriers to allowing race to be an accepted reason to grant financial advantages - correction, make that a financial monopoly - to an American? What makes them any sort of "special" citizen?

Please be so kind as to restrict your answer (if any is forthcoming) to the Constitutional justification for granting Indians such monopoly status?