Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Chad Fairbanks
You already explained it.

federal law signed by Reagan, to negotiate wit the various tribes in order to allow gaming

Pretty exclusive bunch. Not a mandate to allow gambling for all in California that would give the tribes an opportunity to create a competitive business.

72 posted on 10/03/2003 9:04:43 AM PDT by RGSpincich
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies ]


To: RGSpincich
Ahh, but I can see where your logic fails. In California, the Indian Tribes are 'regulated' (for lack of a better word) by both the Feds AND the State. (in other states, it's usually only the feds who 'regulate', but I digress) Since the states hava an 'interest' and could be impacted by gaming, the feds felt the fair way to do it was to have the states and tribes negotiate and reach agreements.

However, if you want non-tribal casinos in California, no federal mandate is needed. California can, if it chooses, pass laws allowing non-indian casinos any time they choose.

Do you see the point now? :0)
77 posted on 10/03/2003 9:07:55 AM PDT by Chad Fairbanks ("Sir, Evil Disembodied Voice of Doom on line 1... shall I tell him you are in a meeting?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson