Dear Editor,
I find it rather strange that
”
Indian
”
or
”
Native American
”
or
”
Indigenous People
”
(we know they aren’t native to India and there wasn’t even
an
”
America
”
here until the Europeans showed up) are suddenly capable and
qualified to establish casinos on a grand scale anywhere they
choose.
Dear Editor,
I find it rather strange that “Indian” or “Native American” or “Indigenous People” (we know they aren’t native to India and there wasn’t even an “America” here until the Europeans showed up) are suddenly capable and qualified to establish casinos on a grand scale anywhere they choose.
This all seems to have started innocently enough, as the indigenous people were hustled onto land that was assigned to them by the federal government, mostly with only tacit acceptance by the natives, and even then often by brute force typical of a victorious nation over the vanquished. The whole thing is a little out of the ordinary, because in most parts of the world where history has recorded an invader taking lands from the native population, there is either annihilation or assimilation of the conquered peoples.
In this case, the American government chose to continue to recognize the identity of the native peoples and through a process of legal fiction, extended to them a sort of “sovereignty” while pushing them from place to unlivable place when the mood and circumstances called for it. I think this was all done to sooth the conscience of the politicians who wanted to appear as beneficent to the beleaguered natives and still be able to pander to the moneyed interests who wanted this or that piece of land, which, at the time they may have occupied. OK, so much for the history lesson.
When the native peoples were on reservations, they were on land that was, by treaty, subject to their own traditional law, owned in a communal tenancy, and assigned to them by the American government as part of this or that “treaty.” What they did on their reservations was essentially subject to historic rules of tradition and local policing from the surrounding towns and counties was tolerated only when it was deemed necessary.
Then, when someone with great entrepreneurial ability stepped forward and decided there was an opportunity to play the sovereignty card and open a gaming casino, local law enforcement set up such a howl as was heard all the way to Washington.
“Illegal gambling,” we cried, but to no avail. The great minds that rule this country saw in the matter the argument of an independent people simply doing what they had done for centuries, but instead of drawing straws or rolling pebbles, they had resorted to games brought to these lands by the invaders; cards, dice, and one-armed-bandits.
Now, we have a group of people, sometimes independent and then again sometimes integrated, who have an opportunity to make big bucks (dollars, that is), and have only to assert their “sovereignty” to do it. The process only requires that they obtain a parcel of land, establish identity as an “Indian tribe,” claim sovereignty, and go to work bilking the general population out of their gambling dollars.
Let’s not go down the path that this practice is only “entertainment,” because that argument has nothing to do with the fact that the Indian gaming interests are evading the normal legal processes and establishing their own set of rules for whatever business they want to conduct. All this on land that has been PURCHASED well outside of the process that assigned them land to live on through treaties with our FEDERAL government. This is a local issue and should, under the Tenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, be handled by local authorities.
The group, whatever they may call themselves, who have proposed a purchase of the Sargent Ranch south of Gilroy, have obtained their money from somewhere. Right? The first question that should be asked is: “Where did the money to make such a purchase come from?”
The next question, and this is one that local authorities should be prepared to ask themselves, is: “Will we be able to retain zoning and planning control over the land that has been purchased by a group of local citizens, a group who’s announced purpose is to have themselves designated as a tribe?”
Give me a break. This is a pure and simple strategy to acquire land for the eventual purpose of avoiding the legal ramifications of setting up tribal lands for the building of a gaming casino.
Local officials are in for a fight. They are either going to retain their ability to control development in their own jurisdictions or, little by little, are going to give up this right to big money interests that are able to negotiate with the state governor to share the wealth and with the federal government to dictate what activities are permissible on which particular piece of real estate. It started small, with a few impoverished tribes using their autonomy to circumvent state laws, but has grown and is growing into a massive power grab for large gaming interests in which “Indian Tribes” have only very little say.
Money talks and believe me when I say that there is big money talking to big politicians.
Bob Winter, Gilroy
