San Diego Union-Tribune Letters to the Editor

Your April 29 editorial, “Not so fast/Indian gaming changes deserve scrutiny,” rang three alarm bells, every single one of which we dispute.

The editorial rang one bell that the state “would not be allowed to audit the books.” Not true! Our original 1999 compact states “Inspection and copying of Gaming Operation papers, books and records may occur at any time . . . .” How much clearer could it be?

It rang a second bell with “a possibility of no regulatory oversight.” In fact, we are subject to six levels of oversight, which is three times the level for Las Vegas gambling. Our 1999 compact states that “regulation of Indian gaming fashioned by Congress . . . rests on an allocation of regulatory jurisdiction among the three sovereigns involved: the federal government, the state . . . and the tribe itself.” We spend about $10 million annually on our gaming commission. We are also subject to regulation by the state Gaming Agency and federal agencies.

It rang a third bell that “Independent examination of the machines is almost nonexistent.” Our amended compact unequivocally states, “The State Gaming Agency may inspect the Gaming Devices – on a random basis.”

This editorial did a gross disservice to the Sycuan Band of the Kumeyaay Nation, in which I serve as chairman, and which operates honestly and ethically, and to the two governors who negotiated the compacts.

DANIEL J. TUCKER
Dehesa Valley

© Copyright 2007 Union-Tribune Publishing Co.

Posted on May 7th, 2007 by admin
Filed under: Gaming, Opinion