CA: Voters shy on two measures to tax tribal gambling, poll shows (Prop 68,Prop 70)

Bakersfield Californian ^ | 10/08/04 | Don Thompson - AP

[NormsRevenge]

SACRAMENTO (AP) - Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger is riding another winner in his opposition to two measures on next month's ballot that would expand gambling while requiring Indian tribes to give up some of their profits, a nonpartisan poll released Saturday shows.

Voters oppose both initiatives, according to the Field Poll conducted before Proposition 68 proponents ended their drive Wednesday with an admission they had little chance of success.

Schwarzenegger began campaigning against propositions 68 and 70 this week, saying that either one would undermine his efforts to negotiate new gambling agreements with individual tribes. He has signed pacts with 10 tribes requiring them to give as much as 25 percent of their profits to the state.

His efforts "remind voters that he's on the 'no' side, but they themselves are instinctively on the 'no' side" even before Schwarzenegger's opposition, said polling director Mark DiCamillo.

Proposition 68, which remains on the Nov. 2 ballot, would likely end tribes' monopoly on Las Vegas-style slot machines by letting card rooms and horse racetracks operate 30,000 of the devices unless every gambling tribe agreed to give up 25 percent of its profits.

Voters oppose the measure 59 percent to 20 percent, the Field Poll found, echoing the internal and public polls proponents cited in ending television advertising for the initiative. That's a 10 percent negative shift just since an August Field Poll found 48 percent opposed and 30 percent in favor.

Proposition 70 would drop limits on gambling on Indian land but require tribes to pay the same corporate tax as other businesses, 8.84 percent of their profits.

A quarter of likely voters remain undecided on the measure, but 43 percent are opposed and 32 percent in favor. The opposition has increased slightly while proponents have slipped a point since the August poll.

So many tens of millions of dollars have been spent for and against the measures that nearly nine of 10 voters now at least are aware of the issue, found the telephone survey of 586 likely voters between Sept. 30 and Oct. 3. The poll has an error margin of plus or minus 4.1 percentage points.

Opposition to the proposals crosses most demographic lines, the poll found: Republicans and Democrats, men and women of all races and most education levels.

The narrowest divisions are among Democrats and those with a high school education or less, where opponents and proponents are nearly evenly split on Proposition 70.

"Here's a group that has spent tens of millions of dollars and they haven't moved the needle" in favor of their proposition, DiCamillo said.

Schwarzenegger campaigned against the two measures at highly publicized events in Irvine and San Jose this week.

Gambling agreements he signed this year would give the state $1 billion this year and $200 million in each future year.

[Fast1]

Simple put a state regulated slot machine in every 7-11.

[EagleUSA]

If we are going to allow gambling in our state, it should pay its fair share to the state...the promoters of the two props do not want to pay the state. The Indians are getting a heck of deal already, raking in scads of bucks...turn about is fair play and needs to have some control and payback to the state. The gamers do not want to do either.

We will defeat BOTH props.

[calcowgirl]

I'm struggling with the second one, not the first.

Prop 68 - A BIG NO

Prop 70 - Maybe

From Yes On 70

Endorsements:

California Nations Indian Gaming Association (CNIGA)

California State Conference of the NAACP

Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association

The National Tax-Limitation Committee

Hon. Jim Brulte (R), State Senator, District 31, California State Senate

Hon. Tom McClintock (R), State Senator, District 19, California State Senate

Hon. Bill Morrow (R), State Senator, District 38, California State Senate

Hon. Jack O'Connell, California State Superintendent of Public Instruction, California Department of Education

Howard Jarvis Tax Foundation Support of Prop 70:

"The governor is going to spend a significant amount of time making sure Californians understand how bad (Propositions) 68 and 70 are for the state," Harris said.

"You'd rather have the governor on your side than against," Russo said. "But the Howard Jarvis organization said it quite well. They've supported the governor on everything he's done. But on this one particular instance, he's wrong."

The governor has reached compact agreements with a half-dozen tribes that currently run casinos. Forty-seven other gaming tribes have not. But Schwarzenegger argues that he should retain the right to negotiate future deals -- a right that Propositions 68 and 70 would take away.

Source

[calcowgirl]

This is one really weird election. You have:

Schwarzenegger, Diane Feinstein, the AFL/CIO, County Sheriffs and Chambers of Commerce, et al

vs.

NAACP, Brulte, Morrow, McClintock, and Taxpayer organizations, et al

It's clear as mud! ;-)
Here's the opposition website:

http://www.no68and70.org/

[NormsRevenge]

I'm gonna pop a beer and cheer for the teams with the cutest (female) cheerleaders in this fight.

I may abstain from voting on a bunch of these propositions.. call it convenient apathy.

Received our voter guide in the mail today,, have some perusing to do the next few days.

To look at who backs what and why and then feel like you can make 'informed' decisions based on that alone is what got us in this mess.. copious amounts of arguments pro/con notwithstanding.. that, and liberal judges tossing out the will of a majority of the voters.. have left a sour taste..... must .. pop .. beer. .. need lime.;-)

[calcowgirl]

I totally understand. It's hard to sift through all the stuff, and to know what to believe. And then of course, there is that fundamental education I somehow missed (the kind that says the way to rid yourself out of debt is to borrow money). ;-)

Pop one of those for me too, eh? :-)

[tubebender]

I'm not really up to speed on this Indian Gaming. Most of the tribes are just fronts for Vegas etc operators and they must share the profits between them. Do the taxes just come from the tribes or do the operators pay also and at what rate? Does anyone regulate "payback" and protect the players as the Nevada Gaming Commission does to the clubs there. I wonder as the states take increases does that mean the operators just increase the ""take" from it's players?

[NormsRevenge]

Here's some links about gaming from a few sources..

Indian Gaming in California

California controversy: gold rush into casinos Here's the Lowdown on Indian Casino Money and California Politics

[NormsRevenge]

oops , here's the 3rd one..

Here's the Lowdown on Indian Casino Money and California Politics

[NormsRevenge]

Schwarzenegger adviser linked to card clubs, Nevada casinos
Rivals cry foul amid actor's attacks on Indian gaming
- Mark Martin, Chronicle Sacramento Bureau
Saturday, September 27, 2003

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2003/09/27/MN76440.DTL&type=printable

[calcowgirl]

I'm still reading about it, so off the top of my head, I don't have answers... but those are good questions I'll be looking to resolve. I suggest we keep this thread going to work through the pros and cons.

We got in a pretty good conversation yesterday (late in this thread). There are some interesting twists on the issue.

It looks like we have a bit of a Republican battle going on over this. Things are getting ugly! LOL. There's a bunch of stuff on the Yes on 70 site.

Here is Sen Morrow's (R) latest comments (from the YesOn70 site).

GOP State Senator Bill Morrow Asks Governor Why Can't Republicans Disagree With Him on Prop 70
Irvine, CA - October 6, 2004

Statement of State Senator Bill Morrow (R), District 38

Thank you for coming. My name is State Senator Bill Morrow.

Like many other Republicans, I have endorsed Proposition 70. I support it because it finally gets a handle on the expansion of gaming by limiting it to tribal lands. It also raises a great deal of revenue for the state at a time when we need it.

I am proud to share these opinions with fellow Republicans and fiscal watchdogs like Senator Tom McClintock, Senator Jim Brulte, BOE Member Bill Leonard, the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association and the National Tax Limitation Committee.

This is excellent company.

In the Governor’s address to the GOP convention in New York, he had it right when he said that we could all disagree without being disagreeable.

But last weekend the Governor personally attacked Republicans who support Proposition 70 – he implied that our support was bought.

That’s just wrong.

Today the Governor is holding an “ask Arnold” town hall and I would suggest a question:

“Governor, why not allow Republicans to support Proposition 70 without attacking or threatening them personally?"

The Republican Party is broad enough to welcome people who support both sides of this issue.

There’s no need to attack each other. I respect the Governor – I think he should extend that courtesy to everyone – including those fellow Republicans who may disagree with him.

That’s all I have to say.

-END-

[tubebender]

Thanks. All were very interesting but the first two were quite educational...

[NormsRevenge]

no problem.

I wish I was a more prolific cut and paster ..

Thanks, that was a nice segue way tho too ;-)

Lots of info out there and folks have to determine for themselves who is gaming who and who is gaining out of these deals and who pays in the end.

[tubebender]

Humboldt county has about 125,000 residents with a large number of them Indians. There are currently 3 casinos. One in Hoopa, one in Trinidad and one in Blue Lake and yet another one being built between Eureka and Fortuna to the south. There is no way they can all make it and most of them have caused a great deal of resentment with their neighbors. The one in Trinidad (Cher Ae Heights) spends a lot of money on community events through out the county. I can't see where they have helped the tribal members that much.

[Publius6961]

Up until I read this article, I had no idea what each proposition proposed. I had not read the propositions, nor any analysis of them.

But I understand them now, based on these two simple sentences:

Proposition 68, which remains on the Nov. 2 ballot, would likely end tribes' monopoly on Las Vegas-style slot machines by letting card rooms and horse racetracks operate 30,000 of the devices unless every gambling tribe agreed to give up 25 percent of its profits.

Proposition 70 would drop limits on gambling on Indian land but require tribes to pay the same corporate tax as other businesses, 8.84 percent of their profits.

Now, I have heard dozens of commercials for both propositions, and didn't have a clue previously. This is called lying by omission, and based on that alone I was prepared to vote against them both.

I am now prepared to vote "yes" on one of them.

[calcowgirl]

I started out thinking I would vote no on 70. Unfortunately, a 'no' vote doesn't eliminate what we have today, or prevent the inevitable under the current law. Gambling is here to stay. So, I am trying to compare what the outlook is under today's law vs. what it would be with Prop 70 instead. The more I look at it, Prop 70 seems to be an improvement. That's a tentative assessment, but it standardizes the 'deals' they can make, limits the gaming to Indian owned land and Indian owned facilities, requires that they coordinate locally, assess the impact to local communities, hold hearings, etc. Under todays law, its whatever deal they can cut with the Governor. If Cruz Bustamante were Governor, you'd have a casino on your doorstep. I'd like to see more checks and balances than that... I'm just not sure this is it.

I also have a feeling that we're seeing turf wars between the tribes. One would think a common set of rules would help; I dunno. Do you know which tribes run those casinos? It would be interesting to research how they feel about this Proposition.

One thing I know... Proposition 68 is a NO (IMO).

[tubebender]

Ask yourself 'Who wrote prop 70?'

[fish hawk]

I told you to leave those Indians alone and go clean up Arcata!!!

[calcowgirl]

Now, I have heard dozens of commercials for both propositions, and didn't have a clue previously. This is called lying by omission, and based on that alone I was prepared to vote against them both.

I am now prepared to vote "yes" on one of them.

I hear ya! I had 'no, no' on my mind intially too. Now it's 'no, maybe'. lol.