[kingu]

The only involvement of the Secretary of the Interior would be when a tribe requests that new land be considered to be put in trust.

Incorrect. All contracts of this nature between a state and a federally recognized tribe must be approved by the Secretary of the Interior, and then published in the federal register. In addition, the Secretary of the Interior may make recommendations on lands being accepted into trust, but it is congress that actually has the power of approval or disapproval.

The framework for gaming on reservations is outlined and ruled by the IGRA, a federal law governing activities on federal trust land. Another controlling issue would be the fact that rancherias in California are PL209 which further governs dealings between the state and the tribes.

[calcowgirl]

Thanks for clarifying. I had read IGRA before, but didn't recall the DOI approval step.

I'm having a hard time understanding what you are arguing for, or against.
Does it have to do with one of the following, or?

-Increase in scope (roulette, etc.)
-Length of compact (99 year)
-Payment of corporate tax rate on revenue
-Severability of issues if found unconstitutional
-Application of Prop 70 legislation to previously negotiated compacts
-Indian monopoly in California

From what I read of Prop 70, it would standardize the compact language which would allow all tribes to get the same 'deal' when executing compacts with the state. Why shouldn't they all have to play out of the same rulebook? Is it the specific rules laid out by the A.C. tribe that you object to? If so, which one?