Lapas attēli
PDF
ePub

our people. So we are able to do some positive things to improve the quality of life for our people. The revenues are spent and recycled at the local level with goods and purchases. We are building good relationships with the local business community by buying these goods and services.

My tribe alone has a $1 billion economic impact on the local economy. We have 6 million customers that come to our facilities. We have a larger impact than the Green Bay Packers on the local economy in Green Bay, WI. And God knows, they have had some bad seasons recently.

The revenue also benefits the States, the counties, the cities, local towns, and the local businessmen as well as some individuals. The revenues as I cited serve a whole lot of useful purposes in terms of day care, elderly centers, police departments, fire departments, court systems, roads, social services, hospitals, and scholarships for education.

In terms of jobs, Indian gaming has produced over 290,000 direct and indirect jobs nationwide. Approximately 85 percent of these jobs are held by non-Indians.

With Federal budget reductions, Indian gaming revenues are even more important now.

A level playing field. A fallacy that Indian gaming must compete with or harms for-profit gaming. New Jersey and Nevada profits are increasing. And we know that States can amend their laws at any time. A fallacy to protect Donald Trump.

One of the originally predicted problems for Indian gaming was "organized crime." Let me report that the Justice Department and the FBI have testified at least on four different occasions that there is no intrusion of organized crime-into Indian gaming. The two or three times that criminal elements tried to infiltrate Indian gaming, they were discovered and reported by the tribes.

And let me add, with the infrastructure, the tribes have been able to put together, they have identified these issues and these problems and have notified local law enforcement agencies or the appropriate agencies to take care of such matters. So the tribes are being very responsible.

Problem gamblers. Tribes understand and abhor addiction problems more than most people. One problem gambler is too many. And let me add that MIGA—the Minnesota Indian Gaming Association—as well as the Pequots, the Oneidas, and others, have implemented problem gambler education courses for their staff, for their people, for their community, and alike for people who could recognize and deal with these situations.

Management companies. Recited in the law, management companies get up to 40 percent in these management contracts. There have been unscrupulous management companies, but the same case still holds true: The Indian communities are very small, the moccasin telegram, word of mouth, and examples of who is not being credible in the management field have been recognized. These people are being weeded out.

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Hill, could you bring your remarks to a close.
Mr. HILL. Just about done.

Mr. HYDE. Are you? Go right ahead.

Mr. HILL. But I wanted to make sure I wanted to get my remarks into the record.

Mr. HYDE. Surely.

Mr. HILL. NIGA does not object to H.R. 497 if fairly applied to all the tribes, and if applied to all gaming, including State lotteries. I understand the lotteries weren't available to testify, but they should be included in this as well. The positive aspects should also be studied as well, and not just the negative side, and this commission should keep an open mind.

Some amendment recommendations: To make sure that we add two credible Indian people to the Commission; they should be members of federally-recognized tribes, with experience and expertise. I reiterate that it would be irresponsible to ignore 30 percent of the markets, and not study the lotteries. It is unfair to study tribal gaming, and ignore State governmental gaming.

Make specific the study of positive revenue aspects. Remove provisions to study whether Indian gaming should be placed under State jurisdiction. Indian gaming is part of our sovereignty. For all the various reasons we would say that.

There is also a process that has been going on for an extensive period of time referencing Indian gaming on the Senate side, led by Senators Inouye and McCain. I would encourage this committee to support this process as it references Indian gaming as they have spent an inordinate amount of time and hours studying these particular issues, and we have been under that microscope since 1988. One last comment, Mr. Chairman, I want to read verbatim for the record here. It comes out of the Congressional Record. However, I would like to read it for everyone now.

One of the greatest Members of the House of Representatives and one of the greatest advocates for Indians to have served in the House was former Congressman Morris K. Udall. On July 6, 1988, Morris Udall made a statement on the floor of the House in defense of Indian gaming, and I would like to quote from this statement. He said, and I quote, "While I am personally opposed to gaming and, in particular, government gaming, I am afraid the time for moral outrage is passed. Gambling as a source of government revenue and charitable funding is too well-established to raise moral arguments against the Indians."

Mr. Chairman, that is the end of my statement, and I would be open to questions.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Hill follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF RICHARD G. HILL, CHAIRMAN, NATIONAL INDIAN GAMING ASSOCIATION

Mr. Chairman, my name is Rick Hill, Chairman of the National Indian Gaming Association. NIGA's membership is composed of 140 Indian tribes whose tribal governments are involved in gaming enterprises to support their governmental operations and programs. NIGA was formed by the tribes to protect their sovereign governmental rights in this area, and to support their gaming interests in the Congress and elsewhere. We also have 43 associate members comprised of entities which have an interest in Indian gaming. On behalf of our member tribes, I want to express our appreciation to you for this opportunity to present our position on H. R. 497, the National Gaming Impact and Policy Commission Act.

GENERAL COMMENTS

Indian gaming represents only about 7% of the entire legal gaming industry in the United States. By way of comparison, Indian governmental gaming is dwarfed by the other form of governmental gaming, State lotteries and associated state-operated gaming, which comprises 37% of the industry. Commercial gaming, including casinos, horse and dog racing, OTB, and jai alai, represents 36% of the industry. The remaining 20% is composed of charitable gaming activities and miscellaneous gaming. Of the 550 Federally recognized Indian tribes in the United States, only 130, or less than one-fourth, have class III Indian gaming enterprises. These class III facilities are located in 25 states, as compared with the 37 states which have lotteries.

We understand that this bill, calling for a study of national gaming activity, may be opposed by the non-Indian commercial gaming industry, by State governments operating lotteries and other forms

of gaming, and by the national charitable gaming industry. We can understand, and sympathize, with that opposition because these groups can see the heavy hand of Federal regulation and taxation arising from such a study.

But, Mr. Chairman, despite unfounded allegations to the contrary, Indian gaming is the most regulated and scrutinized form of gaming in the United States. In 1988, Congress enacted the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act to protect gaming by Indian tribes "as a means of promoting tribal economic development, self-sufficiency, and strong tribal governments". It was also passed to:

"(P)rovide a statutory basis for the regulation of gaming by an Indian tribe

adequate to shield it from organized crime and other corrupting influences, to

ensure that the Indian tribe is the primary beneficiary of gaming operations, and to
assure that gaming is conducted fairly and honestly by both the operator and the
player".

Out of the pre-existing power of tribal self-government, and Federal civil and criminal jurisdiction over aspects of tribal activities, and out of IGRA itself has arisen a complex, comprehensive web of regulations affecting Indian games.

Civil regulations and oversight of Indian gaming is maintained by tribal governments themselves, by the Bureau of Indian Affairs and the Secretary of the Interior, by the National Indian Gaming Commission, by the Internal Revenue Service, and by State governments under class III gaming compacts. Criminal jurisdiction over crimes directly related to, or growing out of Indian gaming.

is vested in the tribal law enforcement personnel, BIA law enforcement, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Justice Department, the Internal Revenue Service, and the States themselves in

certain circumstances. What other form of legal gaming in this country is so infested with government regulation and control?

NIGA, in cooperation with the National Congress of American Indians, has formed a Indian Gaming Task Force to consider pending legislation and other actions affecting tribal gaming, and to develop a general position on such legislation and actions. On August 7, 1995, the Task Force agreed that, in regard to a proposed national study as envisioned by H. R. 497, consideration should be given to the application of Federal minimum standards to all gaming, whether conducted by or for the benefit of private, commercial, state, charitable or tribal governmental interests.

So, Mr. Chairman, while we may sympathize with the concerns of other segments of the gaming industry to the national study proposed by this bill, the tribes would have no objection to such a study if certain tribal concerns were addressed in the bill. First, any such study must remain a national study which will fairly and objectively look at every segment of the industry, including state government gaming activities. Second, as the bill requires that state interests be represented on the study commission by a governor, we insist that there also be an Indian tribal representative on the commission. Finally, the commission, in any consideration it gives to Indian gaming, should be required to consider such gaming in the context of the sovereign powers of tribal

« iepriekšējāTurpināt »