Clash between Senator John McCain (l.) and Tracie Stevens, the chairwoman of the National Indian Gaming Commission, highlights a hearing before the Senate Indian Affairs Committee on regulatory changes proposed by the NIGC.
 
There were fireworks last week when Tracie Stevens, the chairwoman of the National Indian Gaming Commission, testified before the Senate Indian Affairs Committee about regulatory changes being considered and proposed by the NIGC. Stevens is closing in on one year in office heading up the agency and has spent that year consulting with tribes about regulatory issues.

The main issue, however is the Colorado River Indian Tribes court decision that removed the authority of the NIGC over Class III gaming, particularly the imposition of Class III minimum internal control standards by the agency. The decision means that almost 90 percent of tribal gaming operations fall outside the authority of the NIGC, which has clear regulatory oversight of Class II gaming, but a questionable role in Class III.

Senator John McCain (R-Arizona) cut directly to the chase with his first question for Stevens. “I asked you when you appeared before us seven months ago, and I’ll ask it again,” began McCain. “Do you believe there needs to be a legislative fix for this CRIT decision?”

Stevens referred to her opening statement to committee chairman, Senator Daniel Akaka (D-Hawaii), in which she said that she could not comment on any bill since no legislation is proposed.

“I can’t respond to language I don’t see,” said Stevens.
McCain said that was not what he asked.

“There’s a problem here,” said the former presidential candidate. “The NIGC doesn’t have access to the records to do the investigative work that was envisioned when IGRA was passed. As the co-author of that legislation, I’m concerned.”

Stevens said the NIGC was currently consulting with tribes on what to do about the decision.  When McCain asked her how much longer it would take before she would decide upon the need for a legislative fix. When Steven said it would take six more months, McCain exited the hearing, with a dismissive comment.
“So it will be 13 months since I first asked you that question?” he said. “That is really remarkable. Your predecessor (Phil Hogen) had a strong opinion that there should be a legislative fix. This is just another incredible waste of taxpayers’ dollars.”

In her previous testimony, Stevens said that the consultations with the tribes on this issue are necessary and helpful.

“I wanted to know more about the post-CRIT world and Class III MICS,” she explained. “There are 24 states with tribal gaming. Fifteen of those states require tribes to adopt MICS as strict or more that the NIGC standards. Nine other states require tribes to adopt strict controls or develop their own. We are discussing this issue with tribes to better understand where they are. We’re still in the process of reviewing the number of different ways this could affect tribes. There may be a hybrid approach in light of the CRIT decision. We want to resolve this administratively and respect the roles of the tribes, the states and the federal government.”

Jamie Hummingbird, the chairman of the National Tribal Gaming, Commissioners/Regulators, said CRIT has not impacted the regulation of Indian gaming at the tribal level.

“We have 23 years of experience now in regulation Indian gaming,” he said. “All tribes have regulatory standards and the CRIT decision has not impacted those standards.”

Mark Van Norman, the executive director of the National Indian Gaming Association, says the system put in place by IGRA is still strong.
“The NIGC still has authority,” he says. “They conduct reviews and audits on an annual basis. They also have the ability to review the tribes’ enforcement of the tribal gaming regulatory ordinances that the NIGC approves. It gives a level of oversight from the federal government that is not unduly intrusive.”

J. Kurt Lugar, the executive director of the Great Plains Indian Gaming Association, says CRIT impacted just one group and one situation.
“There was a sensitivity here about that case representing everyone,” he said. “But it didn’t.”

The contentious issue of tribal participation in a legalized online gaming industry was raised toward the end of the session by Senator Tom Udall (D-New Mexico). Lugar said the federal prohibition has worked well, but acknowledged there is movement for legalization.

“There’s a lot of pressure coming from certain states,” he said, “Indian Country is very concerned that the state gaming compact process remains in place. Second, we want to make sure there will be no federal taxes applied to tribes that want to participate in online gaming. We feel strongly about this. And third, we need to be assured that there is going to be a level playing field and the current foreign operators don’t have an advantage.”

Lugar says online poker is manageable but tribes are concerned about other, Class III gaming, that may be introduced and that tribes would be able to participate.

“We are currently talking about a consortium; a collective effort to join this industry,” he said. “The internet is a huge place and we have to figure out how to attract enough attention. The branding and marketing of that is a challenge to us.”

“From a policy point of view, we are very concerned that our gaming compact relationships are reviewed and considered before anything is done at the federal level.”
By Staff