James Hena
Among the most effective engines for economic development in Indian Country has been tribal gaming. During the 1970s, the Florida Seminoles pushed the envelope with high-stakes bingo. The Cabazon Band of Mission Indians followed their lead in California, and soon the number of gaming operations grew, as did state resistance. In February 1987, the Supreme Court decided in favor of the argument advanced by tribes that owning and operating casinos on trust lands was an act of sovereignty and could not, therefore, be regulated by state governments. Congress swiftly moved to impose limitations on this decision with the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA). The legislation, which became law in 1988, defined three classes of gaming. Class III included casino-style games and provided state governments a voice in negotiating and a cut of the revenue. Consider the economic and historical context in which James Hena, governor of Tesuque Pueblo, placed the right to engage in gaming during hearings leading to IGRA’s passage and what message he intended to convey.27
I am here today on behalf of my Pueblo and the other gaming Pueblos in New Mexico. . . . It is quite clear to everyone who is involved in this issue that the real difference between H.R. 964 and H.R. 2507 is in the area of jurisdiction over class III gaming. The Pueblo support Federal legislation to regulate gaming on Indian lands along the lines proposed in H.R. 2507. We do not and will not support any bills which provide State jurisdiction over gaming on Indian lands. Those who favor State jurisdiction over class III gaming have raised a concern about creating enclaves for organized crime resulting from runaway Indian controlled gaming. Some proponents of State jurisdiction also seem to feel that our tribal governments are temporary in nature and that we lack the capacity to handle our own affairs.
Let us get the record straight. The fear of organized crime was raised when the tribes first began bingo games several years ago. To this day, there is not any evidence of organized criminal activity in tribally controlled games. The tribes are not about to let this valuable source of revenues and employment fall into the hands of organized crime, and H.R. 2507 will help us to ensure that this cannot happen in the future.
The real concern about jurisdiction over class III gaming emanates of a fear of economic competition. The so-called organized non-Indian gaming interests simply do not want to have competition with the tribes. H.R. 2507 addresses this concern with the requirement that Indian controlled class III games be conducted in an identical manner to State controlled class III games. This approach to regulating class III gaming by Indian governments is consistent with the decisions of the Federal Courts and longstanding Federal policies to promote tribal self-government.
With respect to the idea that tribal governments are temporary in nature and that we lack the capacity to handle our own affairs, let us also get the record straight. The Pueblos have been self-governing for centuries. Although a few of our Pueblo governments are now organized under the Indian Reorganization Act, most continue operating with a traditional form of government we have used for hundreds of years. Pueblo governments pre-date the U.S. Government, and even most of the governments in the international community. We have withstood attempts by a variety of outside forces to diminish or restrict our governmental authority over these years.
It is ironic to hear that we lack the capacity to govern ourselves effectively, because we have been self-governing for more than 750 years. The State of New Mexico is now celebrating its 75th year of self-government. When New Mexico became a state in 1912, the U.S. Congress required New Mexico to disclaim jurisdiction over Indians and Indian lands. New Mexico agreed to this disclaimer of jurisdiction, and the disclaimer clause is still a part of the New Mexico Constitution today. From our point of view, both the Congress and the State of New Mexico recognized and reaffirmed our inherent rights of self-governance through that disclaimer clause. The U.S. Constitution itself recognizes our inherent sovereignty by placing with the Congress the authority to regulate trade and commerce with Indian tribes.
Tribal governments are a part of the Federal system of the United States. As a result, proposals to place Indian gaming under State jurisdiction are contrary to the Constitutions of both the United States and the State of New Mexico, and inconsistent with 200 years of Federal policy and action to recognize and promote tribal self-governance. We strongly urge this committee to reject any proposals to place Indian gaming under State jurisdiction, but to promote instead legislation that requires cooperation rather than imposition of one government’s views over the other. We urge you to uphold the Federal tribal relationship as it is mandated in the Constitution. We pledge to you our fullest cooperation as you work to enact legislation which will promote tribal self-sufficiency and ensure the integrity of Indian controlled gaming.