Integrating The Casino Gaming Industry in Japan: The American Indian Gaming Model
Speaker: Dr. Deron Marquez, Member, Board of Trustees, Claremont Graduate University and Former Chairman, San Manuel Band of Mission Indians
4. State Lottery Revenue
2015
The United States has witnessed a steady lottery growth
from 1977-2015
A small national decline between 2008-2009
Between 2008-2009, only two regions –the Southwest
and Rocky Mountain–did not see a decline in revenue
2015 National Lottery Revenue - $24,606,289,000
The Mideast posted the highest overall lottery revenue at
$7,038,413,000 (28.6%); Delaware, DC, Maryland, New
Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania
Source: http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/statistics/lottery-
revenue
6. 2016 Commercial Gaming
Source: http://gaming.unlv.edu/reports/national_monthly.pdf
23 of the lower 48 States engage in commercial
gaming
Horse/Dog/Off-Track Betting (OTB) Not Included
New Jersey and Nevada are the traditional
gambling centers
Commercial operations have entered into
Pennsylvania, Florida and New York
United States Commercial Gambling Revenue in
2016 equaled $40,588,441,141 (Year-Over-Year
= +1.11%)
8. American Indian Tribal
Government Gaming (Class II & Class
III)
In IGRA[OS1] , Congress included the definition of Class II
gaming as follows: bingo; when played in the same location as
bingo - pull tabs, lotto, punch boards, tip jars, instant bingo,
other games similar to bingo, and non-house banked card
games authorized or not explicitly prohibited by the state in
which the tribal operation is located.
All other games are Class III, except for certain social or
traditional forms of gaming. Class III games include, but are
not limited to the following: baccarat, chemin de fer, blackjack,
slot machines, and electronic or electromechanical facsimiles of
any game of chance.
The NIGC Office of General Counsel reviews games on request
by a tribe or a game developer and issues advisory opinions on
whether they are Class II or Class III
Sources: https://www.nigc.gov/commission/faqs (Emphasis
Added)
9. What is a Tribal-State Compact?
Tribal-State compacts are agreements that
establish the rules to govern the conduct of
Class III gaming activities. Although a compact
is negotiated between a tribe and a state, the
Secretary of the Interior must also approve the
compact.
Source: https://www.nigc.gov/commission/faqs
(emphasis added)
10. What happens to the profits from Indian
gaming operations?
What happens to the profits from Indian gaming
operations?
IGRA requires net revenues from any tribal gaming
operation to be used for the following purposes:
fund tribal government operations or programs
provide for the general welfare of the Indian tribe and its
members
promote tribal economic development
donate to charitable organizations
help fund operations of local government agencies.
If a tribe is able to adequately provide these services and
wishes to distribute net revenue in the form of a per capita
payment to members of the tribe, the tribe must have a
Revenue Allocation Plan, which is approved by the
16. 6
FY16-FY17 Gaming Revenues by Region
Number of Gaming Number of Gaming Number of Gaming Revenue
Submissions Revenues Submissions Revenues Submissions Revenues Percentage
Portland 52 $3,383,829 53 $3,177,311 (1) $206,518 6.5%
Sacramento 74 $8,996,042 70 $8,380,918 4 $615,124 7.3%
Phoenix 59 $3,037,879 57 $2,932,157 2 $105,722 3.6%
St. Paul 92 $4,586,695 93 $4,511,156 (1) $75,539 1.7%
Rapid City 39 $363,257 39 $373,179 0 ($9,922) (2.7%)
Tulsa 72 $2,391,294 69 $2,295,202 3 $96,092 4.2%
OK City 69 $2,311,621 66 $2,264,665 3 $46,955 2.1%
Washington DC 37 $7,333,311 37 $7,260,962 0 $72,350 1.0%
Totals 494 $32,403,927 484 $31,195,549 10 $1,208,378 3.9%
Portland Alaska, Idaho, Oregon, and Washington.
Sacramento California, and Northern Nevada.
Phoenix Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico, and Southern Nevada.
St. Paul Indiana, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Nebraska and Wisconsin.
Rapid City North Dakota, South Dakota, Montana and Wyoming.
Tulsa Kansas, and Eastern Oklahoma.
OK City Western Oklahoma and Texas.
Washington DC Alabama, Connecticut, Florida, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, and New York.
Source: Compiled from gaming operation audited financial statements received by the NIGC through June 26, 2018.
National Indian Gaming Commission
Tribal Gaming Revenues (in thousands) by Region
Fiscal Year 2017 and 2016
Fiscal Year 2017 Fiscal Year 2016 Increase (decrease)
20. Education
Building of “Schools” on Reservations
“American Indian gaming contributed $1 billion to
Oklahoma education over past decade, study shows”
http://newsok.com/article/5461063
“For more than 10 years, shared revenues from Tribal
Gaming have been invested in Arizona to improve
education, health care, conservation and the economies of
local communities throughout the state.”
http://www.azindiangaming.org/resources/arizona-benefits-
fund/
“Indian Gaming Means Education in Indian Country”
http://www.indiangaming.com/istore/Aug07_SpeakOut.pdf
23. College Bound
American Indian Education Fund
http://www.nativepartnership.org/site/PageServer?pagename=aief_progs_sf_scholarsh
ipfund
24. Health
“The income and health effects of tribal casino
gaming on American Indians”
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22427279
“Gaming revenue benefits tribal health care”
http://www.postcrescent.com/story/news/2014/03/
03/gaming-revenue-benefits-tribal-health-
care/5982631/
”American Indian Health”
https://americanindianhealth.nlm.nih.gov
26. Alcohol
National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism
Age-Adjusted Death Rates Attributed to Alcoholic Liver Disease (2008)
https://pubs.niaaa.nih.gov/publications/arcr352/229-237.htm
27. Young American Indian –
Suicide Rates (2016)
“Native American Youth Suicide Rates Are At Crisis Levels” (2016)
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/native-american-youth-suicide-rates-are-at-crisis-
levels_us_560c3084e4b0768127005591
28. Culture
Identity – “Casinos influencing Indian culture — in a
good way”
https://www.minnpost.com/politics-
policy/2012/12/casinos-influencing-indian-culture-good-
way
Language – “Chukchansi Tribe uses casino revenue for
language preservation”
http://www.indianz.com/IndianGaming/2012/025057.asp
“Community Investment – Preserving Culture”
https://www.washingtontribes.org/preserving-culture
31. Cox – 1994-1995
Indian Gaming Regulatory Act: An Overview
Pre-IGRA
IGRA
Compact Process
NIGC
Tribal Ordinance
Management Contract
Civil Enforcement Authority
Constitutionality of IGRA
Criminal-Prohibitory/Civil-Regulatory Distinctions
Class II & Class III
Proposed Early Amendments to IGRA
32. Cox
The opening of the Seminoles high stakes bingo hall in
1979
It was met with immediate resistance from the Sherriff of
Broward County who threaten to arrest anyone playing
bingo…
The district and appeals courts held because Florida’s
bingo laws were civil-regulatory rather than criminal-
prohibitory, the state had no authority to apply its bingo
laws on tribal land.
Seminole Tribe v. Butterworth (Former 5th Cir., 1981; Cert.
Denied, 1982)
The Fifth Circuit (Now Eleventh Circuit) considered the public policy of
the State and the intent of the legislation in enacting the bingo
statute…Florida permitted nonprofit charitable organizations to conduct
33. Cox
1984 Congress began to hold oversight hearings
During this same period (1984-90), BIA officials began to realize the
potential economic benefits of tribal gaming…
Economic Self-Sufficiency
Economic Development
Tribal Self-Determination
BIA approval of loans & loan guarantees
34. Cox
February 25, 1987 – 30 years ago – the Supreme Court affirmed the 9th
Circuit decision in California v. Cabazon Band of Mission Indians
(1987)…
Supreme Court endorsed the criminal-
prohibitory/civil-regulatory distinction employed
by the lower courts.
…and held that “the shorthand test is whether the conduct at issue violates the
State’s public policy.”
The Court acknowledged the congressional goals of encouraging tribal self-
sufficiency and economic development…
35. Cox
The Cabazon decision renewed interest in the 100th Congress to
secure legislation…
The central areas of disagreement centered on:
What games would be regulated (scope of gaming) by tribes and the
federal government?;
Whether state law & jurisdiction should be extended to all other forms
of gambling?
Senate Bill 555, the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act
CL I – Tribal Government
CL II – NIGC and Tribal Government
CL III – Authorized Compacts between States & Tribes
IGRA pleased neither states or tribes
37. Cornell – 2008
The Political Economy of American Indian Gaming
Development of Tribal Gaming
Balancing Doctrine
Economics and Social Impacts of American Indian Gaming
Gaming Impacts on American Indian Nations
Impacts on Non-Native Communities
Researching Success
38. Cornell
Economics and Social Impacts of American Indian Gaming
New jobs generated
Measure the effects of Individuals of changes in life
Both Congress and the Supreme Court in Cabazon said
gaming was/is central to tribal economic development.
Light and Rand (2005)
Cabazon made much of this, and IGRA’s central purpose was to
facilitate such development while respecting other interests
(“Balancing”).
39. Cornell
Gaming Impacts on American Indian Nations
IGRA’s 5 Permissible Uses of Net Revenues (As noted above)
In short, tribal gaming revenues have to be used for what
generally are considered public purposes.
Owners of private-sector casinos do what they please with their
revenues
Taylor and Kalt (2005)
At the national level, using 1990 & 2000 census data examined
socioeconomic change in Indian country…
They compared gaming reservations with nongaming reservations and found
that conditions in both sets improved at a faster rate than such conditions did
in the US as a whole.
It was a positive decade for both gaming and nongaming tribes in terms of:
Rising Employment
Household Income
Reduced Family and Child Poverty Rates
Reduction in Over Crowed Homes
40. Cornell
Gonzales et al (2007)
Looked at nongaming and gaming tribes in Arizona and New Mexico using
1990 and 2000 data
They found socioeconomic improvements in both
Improvements tend to more substantial on gaming reservations
Jojola & Ong (2006)
Looked at 11 Reservations within a 50-mile radius of Albuquerque, New
Mexico
6 with gaming; 5 without
All reservations showed improvements
Gaming tribes experienced greater drops in unemployment rates
Larger increases in per capita incomes
Cozzetto (1995)
Increase on Indian employment
Welfare Payments to Indians Fell
In the early period of rapid gaming expansion in Minnesota
In 1992, with 16 gaming operations open, Aids to Families with
Dependent Children increases for every group in the state except Indians
41. Cornell
Within certain limits, gaming has increased the freedom of
some of those nations to make meaningful choices and
their capacity to act upon the choices made.
Self-Determination
Those “certain limits” are critical piece of the picture, which has
two very different sides.
The legal side
The political/economic side:
Gaming has brought a significant number of Indian nations
enhanced resources with which…to pursue their objectives:
Control over their land
Control over their affairs
Cultural Continuity
Cultural Strength
Improvements in the Welfare of their People
Editor's Notes
Washington DC and Sacramento = $14,874,605,000 or 49.77% of the Total Revenue with 102 Operations or 21.51% of Total Operations. Class III means Revenue Sharing, if at 12%, that would be $1,784,952,600.
The criminal-prohibitory/civil-regulatory distinction employed in Butterworth was followed that same year by a federal district court in Wisconsin…
Oneida Tribe v. Wisconsin (West Dist., 1981)
…and by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.
Barona Group of Capitan Grande Band of Mission Indians v. Duffy (9th Cir., 1982; Cert. Denied 1983)
In each case, the courts rules that the states’ laws were regulatory and thus had no application to the bingo games conducted by the affected tribes.
After the Butterworth decision, high-stakes bingo operations and other gaming enterprises began to open throughout Indian Country.
Concern for Feds and States…No Regulations…Organized Crime
State and Federal Concerns over:
Lack of Regulation
Potential Infiltration of Organized Crime
No National Policy on Indian Gaming Activities
Numerous bills in both chambers…widely divergent, reflecting the conflicting views of the states, tribes, federal and gambling industry…
The States and the Criminal Division favored states regulation
Tribes favored no legislation or at most federal oversight.
Cabazon Band of Mission Indians v. County of Riverside (9th Cir., 1986)
The 9th Circuit had held that the State and county could not enforce their bingo and card room statutes against tribal games on the Cabazon and Morongo Indian Reservation…
Concluded that the state and county gambling laws were civil-regulatory in nature…
Thus not applicable to the tribal games.
The Supreme Court’s action regarding Cabazon (1986) was met with great deal of apprehension on the part of the tribes…
The tribes were under a great deal of pressure to compromise on a bill before a possible adverse ruling was handed down…
Seminole Tribe v. Butterworth (Former 5th Cir., 1981; Cert. Denied, 1982); Oneida Tribe v. Wisconsin (West Dist., 1981); Barona Group of Capitan Grande Band of Mission Indians v. Duffy (9th Cir., 1982; Cert. Denied 1983)