This editorial board endorses a “yes” vote on proposition 48.
Proposition 48 would allow a casino to be built by the North Fork Rancheria of Mono Indians off-reservation in Madera County. It would also prevent the construction of another casino by the Wiyot tribe in Humboldt County, who would instead be paid a share of the Madera casino’s earnings.
Legislation surrounding Indian gaming casinos specifies casinos can only be built on reservation land, in an effort to ensure that they only benefit the tribes living on that land and not private corporations. Proposition 48 would set a precedent in California for “reservation shopping,” the practice of allowing tribes to pick and choose where casinos are built.
In this case, reservation shopping should be allowed because a casino for the North Fork tribe could prove to be a huge economic boon for a historically disadvantaged group. Tribal gaming is a lucrative industry, taking in $7 billion each year. The Madera casino would generate approximately 4000 jobs, creating employment opportunities for a tribe with 69 percent of its population in poverty and 29 percent without jobs.
Opponents of this proposition say allowing the North Fork tribe to build a casino off their reservation would set a dangerous precedent for the proliferation of gambling in urban areas. But these opponents primarily comprise established Indian gaming casinos interested in stifling competition.
All tribes deserve an equal chance at improving the welfare of their communities which have long been and continue to be marginalized. Although opponents of the proposition have urged the North Fork tribe to build their casino on their original settlement in the Sierra National Forest, this land has been unable to garner investment because it is difficult to reach by car.
Thus, it is only fair that the North Fork tribe be allowed to build a casino elsewhere, at a location that would realistically help raise the North Fork tribe out of poverty.
While it is important to regulate gambling and keep its benefits restricted to Native American tribes, each case should be judged on its individual merits. As long as the initiative is primarily in a tribe’s interest and does not harm the economy or environment, reservation shopping should not pose a problem.