As a matter of disclosure, I do not personally like casinos. I have traveled to Detroit, Michigan – the city of my birth, and looked at the neighborhood near the Greektown Casino. To me, it looks like the Casino sucked the life out of what was once a vibrant ethnic and tourist area. Maybe another native Detroiter, one that did not move away in 1983 as I did, will disagree.
But the Boston Globe story implies that whether I like casinos, or Massachusetts government likes casinos, a tribe that is determined can use the Indian Gaming Act of 1988 and open a casino anyway – without state approval – and then contribute nothing to the state coffers. That is not a good result, either. And the limitations imposed by the Indian Gaming Act did not prevent the Seminoles from raking in billions, enough to pay over $950 million for the Hard Rock chain and brand.
Here is the Globe story: http://www.boston.co…
The image is of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts either riding a tiger – and using the leverage it has to expedite the process – or being eaten, and losing a potential revenue source.
That being said, one Casino needs to be all the way West – in Franklin, Hampshire, or Hampden county if casinos come in via riding the tiger – by which I mean state stanctioned and negotiated casinos as opposed to Indian Gaming Act casinos over which our state government would have no control – and from which the general fund would not receive a penny.
The only recognized tribes in Mass. are in Aquinnah and Mashpee.
<
p>
And because Gov. Patrick is insisting on his goofy three-resort plan – which doesn’t work on an economic basis, only a political one – the Wampanoag have fast tracked the application for a tribal trust, which will be able to operate exactly like the ones you saw in Florida, paying nothing to the state. Instead of the 25% the Indians offered the state, that Deval rejected in favor of his own doomed plan.
<
p>
But hey – thanks for playing, Governor!
So I do not know what the “limitations” are, other than what was in the Globe article. I guess I will have to make time to find out. I don’t know if a tribe is limited to 50 miles from its ancestral land, or why the slots are different in a gaming act Casino.
<
p>
What I do know is:
<
p>
1. Florida gets no money from the Seminole casino.
<
p>
2. An indian tribe, if it presses through using the Indian Gaming act, can set up a casino without permission or approval from state government, so the Mashpee Wampanoag can, if they show the same tenacity they showed in getting recognized status, sooner or later build a casino.
<
p>
3. If the Wampanoag go the the federal route, odds favor that the Commonwealth of Massachusetts will get no money at all from the Wampanoag casino’s earnings.
<
p>
4. If the General Court does not approve some form of casino, and the Wampanoags press ahead, build one, and have the ONLY casino in Massachusetts, I expect them to do very well financially – no local competition after all. So it may take them longer, but as I said, if they are tenacious enough, they will succeed.
<
p>
5. If the Commonwealth, looking at the way Floridian government was starved of any proceeds, decides to preempt after all, and legitimizes casinos of some number and variety and location in Massachusetts, then at least a portion of the proceeds will go into the general fund AND casinos will have some state oversight.
<
p>
6. My .02 would be to put one as far west as possible, where the land is cheaper, workers can afford to live, and jobs are few and father between AND the draw would include Connecticut and New York AND not shrivel the life from areas with other attractions [again, the sad state of the Greek Town neighborhood in Detroit comes to my mind]…don’t build on marl, or in hurricane zones [duh].
<
p>
7. So, as with all time-limited leverage, it is use it or lose it. But casino [s] will come thanks to the federal act cited in the Globe article. But that all being said, I find casinos to be a pretty poor imitation of a good time, and not anything I will patronize.
I believe the only type of casino they can open (without state approval) is one with high stakes bingo. I’m not sure this is much of a revenue winner, especially when a little further down the road are much more attractive gaming options.
<
p>
You didn’t mention how much revenue that Florida casino makes. That is a key piece of information. Proximity to other options is another key piece of info.
<
p>
I’m getting tired of refuting this point.
<
p>
The way federal law works is they’ll only allow a tribe to build a gambling facity that uses types of gambling already legal in the state in some form or another. Massachusetts completely bans Class 3 gambling, which includes slots. Therefore, the tribes couldn’t ever, in a million years, build a casino with slots unless Massachusetts politicians let them by legalizing Class 3. Finally, no developer in a million years is going to invest Foxwoods-type money (or more) into a casino without slots. Slots is what makes them the big money. The worst case scenario is the Wampanoags build a Bingo Hall – and while that won’t be great, it’s not going to be nearly as bad.
<
p>
<
p>
That’s the problem. Once you allow Class 3 gambling, Massachusetts will have no ability to control it. There’s currently several tribes looking into building a casino in Massachusetts, from the Wampanoags to the Martha’s Vineyard tribe to the tribe behind Mohegan Sun. If we allow any Class 3 casinos, there won’t be one and we won’t have control over where they’re built.
Ryan,
<
p>
I appreciate your continued work on illuminating the problems with the Governor’s bill and the net downside for the Commonwealth.
<
p>
This story was published by USA today
<
p>
It’s endless….the growth cycle is followed by a down cycle and expansion is needed to compete.
<
p>
Three casinos become six or more. Like every addiction, when fed it grows.
<
p>
The “control” that the Governor envisions is a mirage.
<
p>
<
p>
is Berkshire County home of Tanglewood, the Norman Rockwell Museum, Jacob’s Pillow, MASS MOCA, excellent colleges and the Governor’s second residence.
Irealize it would be illegal (I think it would be illegal) but it was a thought.
<
p>
It’s really sad. What’s next? Nevada has the “Mustang Ranch”. Perhaps we should set up a series of conveniently located brothels throughout the state. Think of all the education it could support.
that a tribal casino can’t have slots or other “class III” gaming, unless the lege and the gov legalize it. Which they are very unlikely to do if there’s nothing in it for them. And which is where the big money is.
<
p>
As I suspect you already knew.
<
p>
You’re saying that Mr. Patrick’s envisioned $2.0 billion in economic activity and 20,000 jobs wouldn’t be enough?!
<
p>
He’d want more? Like a cut of the slots revenue? I’m shocked.
There are two groups of descendents of the Nipmuck confederation tribelets who are applying for federal recognition as a tribe(s). Most of them live in the Blackstone Valley, the tribal homeland is in the hill country surround Worcester. The BIA is slow-walking their application, of course, but supposedly it is convincing.
<
p>
Their leaders have talked of putting up a casino on the Massachusetts/Connecticut border at Sturbridge, screwing with the laws of both states and playing them off against each other for the better deal.
<
p>
It gets more complicated when you throw in the full picture of intertribal and state competition- the Narragansetts in Rhode Island, Pequots and Mohegans in Connecticut, another small tribelet with federal recognition in the New Haven area, the Mohawks’ casino at Verona, NY. The tribes in Maine may also try to compete in the game in a small way…it’s a mess.
<
p>
Patrick has to play a pretty complicated game balancing the Nipmuck groups, the two Wampanoag groups, Suffolk Downs, and the regional inhabitants and regional interests each has going for it.
And then the resulting run down building and slum neighborhoods because no one of any means will want to live anywhere near one of these cesspools.
This is much more simpler than it looks, folks.
<
p>
Federal law: allows tribes to gamble using any method currently legal in the state.
<
p>
Massachusetts law: Bans Class 3 gambling, which includes slots.
<
p>
Developers: Aren’t going to build a huge, mega resort that doesn’t include slots. A vast majority of casino revenue comes from the dinging and the flashing.
<
p>
Where does that leave us? At the worst, the Wampanoags can build a bingo hall, but it’s not going to be the type of establishment that will seriously hurt the Massachusetts economy.
<
p>
Moral of the story? Florida must have had Class 3 gambling already legal in some form or another, that’s why they’re dealing with casinos and we aren’t. If they were so damn inevitable, they would have been built here decades ago!!
But the “bingo slots” look a lot like class III, hence the success.
<
p>
The Globe article states:
<
p>
The Seminoles are negotiating with the state regarding Class III gambling. There was a November 15 deadline, but I have not found any news yet on the outcome.
Florida and the Seminoles did sign a deal last week that gives class III gaming rights to the tribe in exchange for at least $100 million / year.
<
p>
2. I maintain we won’t see Foxwood-type casinos without Class 3. Otherwise, Twin Rivers would be a helluva lot larger than it already is – because developers would have been willing to make it huge.
<
p>
We can’t prevent a tribal glorified bingo hall, but we can prevent a mega resort casino that would destroy local business and be an all-around bad idea. Just don’t expect Matt Viser or anyone from the Globe to illustrate that kind of truth.
Can you tell me how to reconcile these two statements of yours?
<
p>
<
p>
and
<
p>
<
p>
If casinos such the life out of areas, living in Hampden county, I sure don’t want something like that here.
The meat of what we’re talking about here is enacted as 25 USC 2710, with the definitions (particularly of what is “Class I”, “Class II” and “Class III”) being provided in 25 USC 2703.
<
p>
Essentially: Class I games (traditional Indian games) can be held by any tribe, any place, any time. The state has no say.
<
p>
Class II and Class III may only be conducted if the state has made them legal for any purpose. At the moment, in Massachusetts, some Class II is legal (notably bingo). No Class III has been legalized — yet.
<
p>
It’s unclear to me whether legal bingo opens the floodgates to all Class II on tribal lands (which would notably include card games that do not use a house, like baccarat and poker, but not blackjack).
…is a town or state supposedly* obligated under federal law to provide infrastructure for Indian casinos that are not approved by the state? If not, they might find themselves with insufficient ingress and egress, insufficient water and sewage, and insufficient electrical power to run.
<
p>
Regarding *, I am of course referring to the Seminole vs. State of FL line of US SupCt cases, referring to federalism.
<
p>
Actually MCRD had an interesting suggestion. High toll rates on ingress and egress roads.
Not a bad idea. Will never be reality.
…the answer to which I do not know
<
p>
Wouldn’t that be a violation of the equal protection clause or be construed as discriminatory.
<
p>
You are referring to section 1 of the 14th amendment. But it is unclear just how sovereign the Amerind reservations are in the US. If they are sovereign over their own reservations, then it is not exactly clear the extent to which the US constitution or other federal laws are “supreme” or the rights that they might have as against the state to provide them with services.
<
p>
BTW, it is not unusual for a jurisdiction to have sovereign entities within its boundaries. I’ll give you an example. The city of Cincinnati, where I grew up, had, completely within its boundaries, two separate cities, named Norwood and St. Bernard. One of the cities (I believe it was Norwood) was in the news in the last year or so for its exercise of eminent domain following the US SupCt’s abominable Kelo decision. I believe that there were articles about the city’s actions over at the MotherJones web site.
<
p>
I don’t believe residents of the reservations (so called) pay US federal income tax…
<
p>
…but it is apparently not unusual for the residents of US territories to pay income taxes at approximately the same rate as federal income taxes to the territorial government. I’m pretty sure that’s the case with Puerto Rico, and (it’s been a long time since I investigated this) with Guam as well. The US federal government cedes the tax monies to the territories. Consider it a Federal subsidy, if you wish (I do).
<
p>
Regarding the passport issue, I have no idea. As far as I’m concerned the heightened “security” at the US border is, as the Bavarians would say, einen Schmarrn. You don’t need to know what it means, nobody does, but yes, it basically suggests what it sounds like: “totally and completely stupid”.
<
p>
BTW, when we are loading onto the aeroplane to return to the US from Munich, at the Munich airport there are two levels of security to board a plane to the US. They were to all intents and purposes duplicative of each other. We asked the booking lady at the counter whether everyone flying out of the airport had to go through these duplicative protocols. She rolled her eyes, and said something to the effect that, no, this is special, just for you, courtesy of your wonderful government. But it provides employment to yet more Germans, just as the TSA provides pretty much unnecessary employment to Americans in the US.