Indian Gambling Proposition

I read your Feb. 26 editorial against Prop. 1A. I believe the editorial overstates the case when it says “wide-open Nevada-style casino gambling in California” will occur if Prop. 1A passes. Please understand that the gambling will stay on tribal lands. And only about half the Indian reservations lie close enough to population centers to make operating a casino ecxonomically feasible.

The editorial also overstates the case when it characterizes tribal casino operations as “poorly regulated.” I give you a partial list of entities overseeing the tribal casinos right now: 1) a tribal gaming commission for each casino mandated by the federal Indian Gaming Regulatory Act; 2) the U.S. Justice Department; 3) the IRS; 4) the FBI; 5) the EPA; 6) the U.S. Interior Department; and 7) the national Indian gaming commission. Congress also exercises oversight in this matter. If Prop. 1A passes, the state will also gain a regulatory role. One could say that the tribal casinos face regulatory overkill.

ED BURBEE

Pechanga Indian Reservation

Temecula

*

Thank you for your “no” position on flawed Prop. 1A. Gambling proposals always make big promises of jobs and wealth to communities but never perform as promised. Look at the messes in the New Jersey gambling and the lotteries around the country. The casinos would require hundreds of millions of dollars to set up and they would be controlled by the out-of-state organizations that provided the set up wealth.

The vast majority of persons in the tribes would get the dregs, some menial jobs at low wages and a few handouts, while the riches would go to those outsiders who were in control.

RALPH and JANET DUNHAM

Yorba Linda