|
Source
Phoenix-area casino bill denounced as biased By Caitlin McGlade The Republic | azcentral.com Thu May 16, 2013 10:56 PM The Bureau of Indian Affairs director on Wednesday condemned a bill that would prohibit more casinos from opening in metro Phoenix, saying that the measure singled out one tribe. Director Michael Black told members of the U.S. House of Representatives Subcommittee on Indian and Alaska Native Affairs that the legislation would bar the Tohono O’odhams from using reservation land for a casino like other tribes. The non-voting hearing was about a bill that Rep. Trent Franks, R-Ariz., introduced in April to ban gaming on newly acquired reservation land until 2027. The measure would stop the Tohono O’odhams from building a planned casino at 95th and Northern avenues because the land has not yet been designated a reservation. Franks last year sponsored a similar bill that passed in the House but never got a vote in the Senate. Franks called this bill the “Keep the Promise Act of 2013,” a label Tohono O’odham Chairman Ned Norris deemed “deeply offensive.” “The title of this legislation suggests that I and my people are liars and cheats,” Norris said. Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community President Diane Enos spoke in support of the bill, because her tribe, as well as others, oppose another Valley casino. Norris, Enos and lawmakers argued for nearly an hour over whether the Tohono O’odhams’ casino plans were fair and legal, and whether the “Promise Act” would actually break a promise Congress made to the Tohono O’odhams. That promise, Norris said, was bound by a 1986 law that gave the tribe money to buy land after a federal dam flooded some of the tribe’s reservation. The law stated the replacement land would become reservation land. Under that law, the tribe purchased unincorporated land surrounded on three sides by Glendale with a shell corporation. In 2009, the tribe announced its plans and sought to have the land taken into the reservation system. However, Valley tribes and the state say the casino would violate a 2002 voter-approved compact they say capped the number of casinos in the Valley. Enos said the proposal breaks a trust among tribes. Hence, the name of the bill. The compact contains no such language, but the Valley tribes and the state point to campaign rhetoric that the compact would bar more Phoenix-area casinos. Franks’ bill says as much, too, stating that Arizona tribes agreed to limit casinos around the state and “in particular within the Phoenix metropolitan area.” There seemed to be confusion on the panel as to what exactly the compact contains. “How do you arbitrarily break the compact?” asked Subcommittee Chairman Don Young of Alaska. Maria Wiseman, representing the Department of the Interior, answered. The Phoenix-area limitations were not in writing, she said. A recent U.S. District Court decision pointed to that omission during a ruling that largely favored the Tohono O’odhams. “Well, that’s not what they sold to the public,” Young responded. Rep. Raúl Grijalva asked Enos why the limit wasn’t spelled out in the compact. She said it wasn’t necessary because of the trust the tribes had for one another. “I remember of the campaigns around (Proposition) 202, all of the advertising ... there was a leaflet that said no gaming in the Phoenix area. I mean, that’s like some of my colleagues who run on ‘I will never cut benefits for Social Security’ and then, two weeks later, they’re voting for a chained CPI or something else,” Grijalva said. “It’s just things that happen.” He questioned why Congress should pass a law when several lawsuits that challenge the Tohono O’odham plans are moving through the courts. Enos had early said the tribes had no other venue because the court could not hear their “claims of deception and fraud.” She and Rep. Paul Gosar said the bill was crucial to protect the compact, which would dissolve if Arizona were to ever allow casinos off reservations. The compact limits casinos to tribal lands, but she said non-tribal interests would pursue casinos if they saw another casino open. Rep. David Schweikert noted “Arizona is a very easy initiative referendum state” and asked Enos how long she had been hearing non-tribal casino advocates saying they would seek to open casinos if the Tohono O’odham plans moved forward. “For years,” Enos said. “Those non-Indian interests have already started to say, ‘Look, you cannot trust the tribes,’ and they will demand that the exclusivity for tribes be broken.” Grijalva dismissed the argument as the U.S. District Court ruled the Tohono O’odham plans do not violate the compact. “And Chicken Little will rule the world, and the sky will fall,” he said. The bill now heads to the House Committee on Natural Resources, where the panel may make changes and vote to send it to the full House. |