Before you head to the polls...

... you might want to read this if you still have any confusion regarding 94, 95, 96 and 97. One of our regular readers sent this out to family members forwarded a copy to me. I thought it would be a good post for today, election day.


Dear friends and family,

Why we should vote note on 94 - 97.

At stake there is a supposed 9 Billion dollars of revenue for the State of California, and for the tribes almost 20,000 slot machines. California will far surpass Nevada as a gambling State with the addition of these slots.

It is 9 billion over 20 years, around 200 million per year. It is less then .5 percent of the estimated revenue from these tribes - a FRACTION of a percent of what they would have to pay if they were any other business. Businesses and individuals pay taxes in our country to support all the infrastructure we have and need. (emergency services, roads etc. Imagine what would happen if we suddenly had no money for these things. Imagine what happens just when one business increases traffic and visits to its facility by over a million people a year, with ZERO money going to the government to cover costs related to all those new visitors, not to mention regular employees and contractors.)

Will it it actually be 9 billion? Most economists who have been crunching the numbers agree that it could be as little as half that amount. The sad fact is Indian casinos are unregulated. There is no one checking to see if they had the revenue they claim. They can and do say anything they want under the protection of their 'sovereign immunity'. They can actually decide not to pay and the state has no recourse. Once the slots are in they are in. Right now there have been lawsuits filed because they have not paid on the old compacts. Matter of fact the tribes have paid LESS THAN 10 PERCENT on the old compacts, so why should we think they will pay more on a new agreement? These lawsuits will likely be thrown out because you cannot sue a sovereign nation. So the answer is NO the state will probably not collect what is being promised and there is no recourse to do so.

Where does the 9 billion really come from? California gamblers will have to LOSE 60 BILLION dollars in the slot machines first. This is 60 billion that will not pay mortgages, utility bills, tuition or get donated to charities. It is 60 billion that will not pay for other entertainment venues where taxes to the state are generated. It is 60 billion dollars down the toilet, there are no residual taxes that will help the State. Add to that for every dollar of revenue a casino makes - there is $3 - $5 dollars in social costs (addiction and crime etc). You don't have to be a math genius to see where this is going. If you don't believe that crime and casinos go hand in hand, take a little trip to your nearest Indian casino and talk to some of the business owners and residents in the area. By the way, thats 60 billion lost in slots only. This does not include millions spent on rooms, meals and merchandise. Rooms, meals and merchandise they will charge YOU state tax on but THEY will NOT remit to the state. Illegal you say? For any other business yes but Indian casinos are immune.

Another nifty little deal that was written into these compacts was to do away with what is called the 'special distribution fund'. This fund is currently what the Indian casinos pay into and from there the money is supposed to be earmarked for certain things like helping non-casino Indian tribes, education etc. Lets forget for a moment that there are lawsuits pending because money has not been paid into the special fund properly at this time. What the governor has now arranged is for the money to go into the general fund. Where it can be used for anything, anything at all. Things like special interest projects for taking care of high-paying donors to political campaigns. So you can kiss that money good bye.

Then there are the politics behind these referendums - and this is where it gets very murky and the implications are very disturbing. This summer our Governor in a bid to secure these deals NO MATTER WHAT THE CALIFORNIA VOTERS DECIDE, sent them off for approval to the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. See, by getting federal government approval it is thought that it will trump any vote by Californians. Tribes are under federal jurisdiction NOT the State. It gets more twisted. The Department of Interior LOST this paperwork for over 80 days. They are given 45 days to review and approve, otherwise by default, the agreements are AUTOMATICALLY APPROVED. So these compacts were approved by default without review by the feds. If you think I am nuts, just google it, it was all over the web and news 2 weeks ago. (or go to the website at the bottom of the page - it has links to original news stories)

There is much, much more. The Pechanga tribe has been taken over by outsiders and the real Pechangas have been ousted. The San Bernardino tribe is being run by the Mexican Mafia. Workers at these casinos are not protected like workers in any other business in the US, nor are visitors to Indian Casinos. The laws of the United States are not valid on tribal lands. But what you are seeing on TV is an ad blitz funded by $120,000 million dollars of gambling money telling you things that are simply not true. There is no money earmarked for education or to help poorer needier tribes, there is no guarantee the funds will be paid at all, there are no economic studies that support any of the claims the tribes are making. They are NOT creating NEW revenue - it is simply money that is going from one venue to another, and this new venue is a black hole that generates no tax money for the state. The iffy 9 billion is a mere drop in the bucket of what that money would do if it were spent elsewhere.

The tribes will say anything at all to get these slots. Not a word of it has to be true. Who is going to sue them if it isn't true? What court will allow a suit against a sovereign nation? No one and none. There are many tribes who are not included in these compacts who are against them, but they cannot afford to fight the kind of money that is being dumped into the campaign. Indeed there are tribal members within these four that are against the compacts but they cannot speak up for fear of being disenrolled.

Indian casinos for better or worse might be here to stay, but Californians could do a lot better than this measly deal by our Governor and members of the Legislature. Vote NO on 94, 95, 96 and 97.

Vote NO on 94, 95, 96 and 97

Another excellent summary on 94 -97, the rich get richer - there rest of us pay the bill for it. An irony this article does miss though, these very rich so-called 'Indians' STILL get free health care services provided by the American taxpayer. I am not talking about the dis-enrolled Indians - they get squat. I am talking bout these newly made millionaires, they get free health care in their tribal clinics paid by YOU and ME.

Indian casino measures help rich tribes, but nobody else
NO ON PROPS. 94-97: WORKERS AND NEIGHBORS DESERVE A BETTER DEAL
By Enrique L. Fernandez

The Indian gambling initiatives on Tuesday's ballot are all about an old, familiar story. The rich get richer. While the rest of us? We lose.

Four Southern California tribes are behind these deals that would give them 17,000 new slot machines. That's enough slot machines to fill 12 Las Vegas casinos. That's enough slot machines to make those four tribes spend $92 million and counting to get us to vote yes on their deals.

Propositions 94 through 97 are great deals - for those four tribes, Pechanga, Morongo, Sycuan and Agua Caliente. But for California taxpayers, for workers at those casinos, for the communities around those casinos and the environment - in short, for everybody but those four tribes, we need a new, fairer deal.

The 17,000 slot machines would effect one of the largest expansions of gambling in U.S. history. When we originally said yes to Indian gaming, less than 10 years ago, I think most of us thought we were helping all Native Americans in California, and help was needed. I don't think most of us expected it would turn into this - that we are now asked to vote to make four wealthy, powerful tribes even more wealthy and more powerful.

Now, back to that $92 million those four tribes have been spending: Mostly, they've been using that money to buy ads to tell us how the state of California will get money from this - so we should vote yes. But that turns out to be just another sales pitch. The state's impartial Legislative Analyst's Office says that any money the state would get from these deals would be less than one half of 1 percent of the state's annual general fund. That's next to nothing - and certainly no cure for the state's budget troubles.

But even that money we may never see. These four tribes wrote into their deals language that eliminates any outside independent accounting of the tribes' books, language that means they will decide how much money they give the state. The state can look at the tribes' math and check the addition. It can't go back and check the books that math is based on.

And here's an irony. These wealthy tribes, which already make hundreds of millions of dollars a year, squeeze still more money out of their own lowest-paid employees. A study of the Agua Caliente casino found that its minimum-wage workers (and there are plenty - in the kitchen and the bars) make less money now than they did in 2002, when you adjust the numbers for inflation.

And at that same casino, many of the families of those workers have to get their health care through taxpayer-funded public health programs, because the casino's health insurance isn't affordable.

Here's another irony. Most tribes in California have no gaming at all, or else they only have small operations. Even though the Big 4 tribes would make billions of dollars in profits if they get these new slot machines, they didn't offer to share a dime of those new profits with even the poorest tribes (and poor tribes are very poor). In fact, under these deals, the existing revenue-sharing with those tribes will end up being cut. And small tribes near the Big 4, with small gaming operations, are liable to be swept away by these massive new casino operations. Also, if you happen to live near one of those casinos - whether you're a person, a plant or an animal - you're affected by the weakening of environmental protections in these deals.

The only good news is that we get a chance to turn down these deals. A ", no" vote tells Sacramento and the tribes they need to go back and negotiate better deals. Instead of a windfall for just four wealthy, powerful tribes, we can get a fairer deal for all tribes, more money for the state, more protection for the areas around these casinos and more protection for the men and women who work in them. We can and should do better. But to do that, we have to first vote "no" on Propositions 94 through 97, the unfair gambling deals.

Pechanga Update

Yesterday dis-enrolled members of the Pechanga tribe held a protest against the referendums in front of the Pechanga casino. TribalWatch staffers were in attendance and have photo art which we will be posting later today. Below is a brief story from O. Pechanga's blog about a confrontation during the protest from one of the millionaire tribal members. What a classy guy eh? The implication of the sheriff being bought to defend the casino is not new at all . One of the first things the tribe does when it opens a casino is dump money on the local sheriffs dept. to ensure their loyalty. It happens in Santa Barbara County at the Chumash casino, in San Bernardino and San Diego, and just about anywhere you have an Indian Casino.


Pechanga Member Threatens Demonstrators at No on 94-97 Protest.

As discussed below we had a successful gathering in front of Pechanga Casino in Temecula. An interesting start to our demonstration.

Raymond Basquez Jr. son of Raymond Basquez Sr., one of those involved in eliminating 25% of the tribe, who can be seen in Pechanga's commercials, long hair, saying he just "wanted to give back" threatened us yesterday. He drove his shiny Escalade west on Pechanga Parkway, yelling at us, "Get a JOB!" and flipping us off. He sped west and made a quick left to make a u-turn. Aggressive driving in his huge vehicle, we knew he was coming back. A little disconcerting, because we knew he had been on parole. Ray Jr. stopped his Escalade about 7 car lenghts from the limit line, with a green light and GETS OUT of his vehicle. He circles to the back and my brother and I head back to meet him. When he sees my brother coming, he opens his back door (not a good sign in CA) but we advance anyway. He pulls out....... a Yes on 94-97 STICKER to put on his car! ROFL! He's taunting us: "you're out on the street, man!" Guess he was in women's prison. Raymond Jr. YOU ARE A PUSSY. Pechanga, great job as having Raymond Basquez Jr. as your defender.

Luckily for Pechanga, they had the Riverside County Sheriffs on Indian Land to protect them. OH yeah, thank RCS. We had a bottle thrown at us and you know what? We picked it up so you couldn't complain that we left trash in the area.

Rights Protest at Pechanga

The Pechanga Tribe is one of the most notorious of the gambling casino tribes when it comes to the treatment of their own people. They have disenrolled hundreds of tribal members, targeting dissenters who had the audacity to question the leadership. On Saturday February 2, 2008 at the Pechanga Casino in Temecula people will gather to protest this self-styled dictatorial regime and its policies - and its plans to add thousands of slot machines. From Original Pechanga's Blog:

"No Rights, No Compact!"
Saturday, February 2, 2008 @ 10 am
Pechanga Resort & Casino
Temecula, CA

Pechanga tribal officials have signed a compact with the State of California that would authorize the largest expansion of casino gambling in U.S. history. Yet Pechanga tribal officials have tried continuously to keep California voters from exercising their Constitutional right to participate in the referendum process. First, they tried to block voters from signing petitions. This failed as nearly 3 million signatures were gathered to put the deals on the ballot. Next, Pechanga filed a lawsuit to keep the Prop 94 from going to the voters- this also failed.

Why are Pechanga officials so eager to deny California voters their right to decide this issue when it was California voters who approved gaming on Indian lands in the first place? Could it be that the Pechanga officials know that its "sweetheart deals" may not hold up to voter scrutiny?

No Rights, No Compact!

It should come as no surprise that a tribe that has denied its own members basic rights guaranteed by tribal laws and the Constitution would work so hard and spend so much money to deny other Californians their rights as well. Should you really expect Pechanga officials to value and respect the rights of others when they have not done the same for their own citizens?

Due process and equal protection of the law are hard to come by at Pechanga. Throw in blatant disregard for the Constitution and lack of protection of basic rights, and you will begin to understand why nearly 300 Pechanga members have been stripped of their citizenship- and many hundreds more denied membership- since California voters approved tribal gaming and Pechanga became one of the wealthiest tribes in the State.

Please join us on February 2nd to protest the rights violations committed by Pechanga tribal officials, and please vote No on Prop 94.

Pete Wilson says Vote NO on 94, 96, 95 & 97

Pete Wilson is a gentleman, when he calls the tribes' advertising 'misleading'. The ads are downright falsehoods and lies - but when you are a tribe with a casino you can say anything you want and you have enough money to get your deceitful words out there. If your lies become evident who is going to take you to task? No one will because you can hide behind sovereignty.

Former governor opposes Indian casino gambling

Former California Gov. Pete Wilson reasserted his opposition to Indian casino gambling during a speech in Thousand Oaks on Wednesday, and he predicted the state won't receive significant new revenue as a result of the four gaming propositions on the ballot next Tuesday.

Wilson's stance puts him at odds with a fellow Republican, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who has endorsed Propositions 94-97.

"I don't think it will lead to increased revenues for the state," said Wilson, in response to a question from an audience member at the luncheon on the campus of California Lutheran University. He was speaking only a few hours before the Republican presidential candidates were scheduled to debate nearby at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library in Simi Valley.

Schwarzenegger and other supporters of the four initiatives say they will give a measurable boost to state revenue by increasing the number of slot machines allowed at four Indian reservations in Southern California.

Wilson, who was governor from 1991 to 1999, described the advertising campaign in favor of the initiatives as "misleading" and the promise of more money for the state as "hypothetical."

Breaking News.... Warrant for Sammy Sockpuppet issued

This just in from Chumashland in Santa Barbara County. Mr. Sammy Cohen, counsel for the Chumash Casino (and Vincent Armenta's sockpuppet) was supposed to appear in court today on charges of domestic violence. Basically, as we reported in December, he was beating his wife in front of the Chumash Casino and was arrested. Mr. Cohen FAILED TO APPEAR, and a bench warrant has been issued for his arrest. Stay tuned...

Previously on TribalWatch:

This time it was the "wine" not the "whine"..

Once it was about the need, now it's only about the greed

Searching the web for information on 94, 95, 96 & 97 one finds a plethora of editorials covering the issues. What becomes blatantly clear is how shallow the claims are on the "vote yes" side. If it was such a good deal why is it necessary to spend so many millions to convince voters it is what the tribes are claiming? If it was the win-win deal they are touting there would be no argument. It is no longer about tribes living in poverty, it is about unfettered expansion of the worlds largest casinos, might as well leave the word "Indian" out of it. Indeed, many tribes have been taken over by people who have little or no Indian heritage, and have ousted the real tribal descendants.

Editorial: It's simple: No on 94, 95, 96, 97
Chico Enterprise-Record
Article Launched: 01/28/2008 12:00:00 AM PST

Deciding how to vote on the four Indian casino measures on the Feb. 5 ballot is a lot like choosing the best hog in a wallow.

The common characteristic of the three main players in this debate is greed, and the thin self-righteous arguments each offers just leave us shaking our head. Does anyone really believe the hooey they're offering up?

On the one hand are the four tribes themselves, which each operate a casino with 2,000 slot machines and many other devices for separating gamblers from their cash. The four tribes are quite small numerically, and have already advanced beyond the legitimate "lifting themselves up from poverty" pitch Californians agreed to when they first approved Indian gambling.

The four tribes have grown from desert slums to shimmering moneymaking palaces. They spend as much on manipulating state government through campaign contributions and other means as is spent on the welfare of their members. And that political spending is largely exempt from most state and federal regulation as the tribes are sovereign states.

Then there's the state, which eagerly accepted the compacts with the four tribes as a way to increase revenue to its overdrawn general fund. At the time the compacts were moving through the Capitol in 2006, they were sold as adding more than a billion bucks to state coffers each year. The estimate is now down to below $200 million over the next few years, maybe rising to a half-billion dollars annually by 2030 when the deals expire.

The increase comes at the expense of local government, by the way. Currently the four tribes pay into what's called the special distributions fund, most of which is used to offset impacts to local government.

For example, the two Oroville casinos kick about a million dollars a year into that same fund, and that money has been spent on upgrading fire and police protection and fixing roads in Oroville and southern Butte County.

The four south state tribes are paying about $28 million into that same fund, which is being spent on the same kinds of benefits for the Riverside and San Diego County jurisdictions near the casinos. That $28 million payment vanishes under the four compacts covered by Propositions 94, 95, 96 and 97. It's replaced with a requirement that the tribes negotiate with the local jurisdictions to cover any impacts. And we wish those two counties luck in dealing with the sovereign states within their boundaries.

Finally, there are the opponents to the four propositions. Gambling interests. Go figure. Why would horse track operators and Las Vegas casino operators oppose these compacts, since they're brothers in arms?

Oh yeah, they're competitors. More money spent at the casino means less money spent at the track or Vegas.

That points to one of the reasons we oppose all four measures. They aren't boosting the economy of the state. Expanding these four casinos just channels spending from one venue to another. And the venue the spending is being diverted to doesn't pay sales or property taxes, another hit on local government.

If these four propositions pass, state government gains slightly, the economy is largely unaffected, and the local governments that have to haul the freight get whacked. And four wealthy tribes that have shown themselves to have an agenda beyond aiding their people get their coffers stuffed.

We suppose those of us in Northern California could say, "So what, two south state counties take a hit and state government's a little better off." But there should be no question that other tribes will seek similar deals if these four stand. And at some point, the hurt's going to hit home.

In any case, these four propositions deserve a no vote.