Advertise Here
Deliver your message to thousands of readers every day.
Our readers are influential opinion makers - politicians, journalists and activists.
Our latest headlines
- Weekly Radio Address: Assembly Lead Water Negotiators Huffman, Caballero Discuss this Week’s Historic Agreement to Solve California’s Water Crisis
- Feinstein Once Again Flirts With Entering the Governor’s Race
- A Good Health Care Bill Emerging from the House
- Schwarzenegger Applauds Passage of Peripheral Canal/Dams Water Package
- "Historic" Water Deal Draws Both Praise and Criticism
- Republican State Senators Vote for Administrative Chaos, Backdoor Cuts in IHSS
- Assembly Budget Committee Follow-up Informational Hearing on Implementation on IHSS Program Changes
About Us
David Greenwald, Editor. (Contact David.)
CFC Education Foundation, Publisher. (Contact us.)
Got a news tip? Want to write a guest column?
Contact David here.
About California Progress Report.
Founded by Frank D. Russo (Publisher and Editor, 2006-08).
Sponsors
Books
Tribal Gaming Money Dwarfs All Other Contributions on California Ballot Propositions
By Frank D. Russo
On Friday, the Pechanga Band of Temecula, one of the big four tribes who stand to gain from passage of Propositions 94 to 97 and 17,000 new slot machines, contributed $30.8 million in support of these propositions. This brings the total to the yes on 94-97 campaign to $68 million dollars, dwarfing not only the amount raised by opponents who seek to overturn the legislature’s approval of the slot machine compacts. But all contributions made on the other ballot measures being considered February 5, 2008—including term limits. [Editor's note: See corrected figures below in comments.]
The last regular reports of campaign contributions on the California Secretary of State’s website are out of date. One has to look at the late and over $5,000 contributions to get an idea of where the money is coming from and going to—at least so far—on the often overlooked ballot propositions that voters will (hopefully) be grappling with in addition to choosing a Presidential candidate for the November election.
Billions of dollars—estimated to be as high as a net win of $60.2 billion for these four tribes are at stake.
This may be only the beginning of money spent, almost exclusively by the tribes on the yes side.
The second largest amount of money on ballot propositions in this cycle is on the “no” side of the Prop 94-97 gambling propositions, and most of it also comes from tribes—those who are not part of the arrangement with the four tribes. At least $11.5 million of the opposition funding comes from “Tribes for Fair Play” out of what appears to be $28 million raised in opposition. There is substantial money— millions each from race tracks and labor that make up the balance. A significant portion of the money raised by opponents was spent on qualifying the four referenda for the ballot.
By contrast, the “yes on 93” campaign to reform California’s term limit laws is a piker, coming in at $10.7 million with the “no on 93 side showing a over $3.5 million in contributions. The amount of money contributed to the yes side of the casino measures on Friday alone is triple the entire amount raised by those who want to reform term limits.
The “yes on 93” money comes from a large list of California interests—from labor to groups that include the pharmaceutical industry and Democratic members of the California Assembly. The “no on 93” money that can be found on the Secretary of State’s site, including late and large contributions reported, comes almost exclusively from Fairfax Virginia—over $3 million from U.S. Term Limits Inc. or Term Limits America PAC located there.
Those supporting Proposition 92, the Community Colleges Funding, Fees, and Governance measure have raised $4 million while opponents are only showing about $800,000. Most of the backing for the “yes on 92” side comes from teachers and groups affiliated with the Community Colleges while the “no on 92” money is virtually all from the California Teachers Association which opposes the measure because of possible effects on K-12 educational funding.
There is one other measure on the ballot, Prop 91—an orphaned item on the ballot—that has had no major funds spent for or against it. In fact, the “yes on 91” argument in the ballot pamphlet even urges a “no” vote because it was superseded by an agreement passed with the infrastructure bond measures in 2006—but too late to be taken off the February 2008 ballot.
Comments
Is someone trying to buy an election or what? If those same 4 Tribes would invest that much money into their Workers, they would have a great place to work. I'm voting NO on Prop 94-97...my vote is not up for sale. I support Tribal Gaming; however, these "new" compact are unfair to Workers, the environment, other Tribes and all of Califonia. VOTE NO!
Posted by: Steve Valkenburg at January 6, 2008 12:08 PM
Steve, I would like to ask you how these agreements are unfair to workers, the environment and other tribes. Workers are still able to unionize if they want, they just don't have the clause the union wants about mailed voting cards, so they can organize easier. As for not being fair to the others tribes, Pala is one of the main donors against these compacts and the compact they are working under allows them to add an unlimited number of slots, so they have the potential to grow much larger than any of these tribes.
Posted by: Clarification at January 6, 2008 01:09 PM
Working on a new computer and software, I have made a mistake in the figures and dates of contributions and sorted the dollar amounts of contributions without the dates and contributors changing columns. A reader emailed me and reviewing the data, on Thursday $10 million was contributed by the Morongo Tribe. A total of $54.5 million has been contributed in support of Propositions 94-97 by the four tribes. The Pechange contributions are $20.3 million of that amount.
Posted by: Frank D. Russo at January 6, 2008 04:31 PM
Unfair to other tribes, because these new MOA takes away the special funds for tribes that have no casino.
Pechanga should not be rewarded for violating their own people's civil rights, voting rights and for abusing their elders.
At my blog, which is linked to my name here, there are many examples of why Pechanga should not get our vote. Until they take care of their members like they promised, we should vote no. Since unions are unhappy with the way they can organize, all union members should vote no. Until California gets a guarantee of seeing the correct accountings, all Californians should vote no.
Let's see, Pechanga is spending $30.8 million trying to convince us this was a good deal and that sure seems overkill for a good compact for us.
Vote NO on 94
Posted by: Original Pechanga at January 6, 2008 04:36 PM
Dear Clarification,
Currently workers in many California tribal Casinos do not share in the same Workers Rights all other Californians have. Even Wal-Mart workers qualify for state disablility...why not the workers at Morongo? Morongo would under the new compacts become the largest casino in America...why not share with the workers and give their employees the right to organize like my fellow workers do. Why are those 4 casinos that would profit most fighting their workers having rights?
I'm concerned about all workers...I'm proud of employeer...they provide fair wages, great benefits and allow us to share in part of their success.
Who is doing the accounting on these 4 casinos?
San Manuel Tribe has a commercial about helping a high school in San Bernardino. Why don't they mention how they worked around providing provailing wages to those that worked on the school. (((Humm, non-union low payed workers)))
I support gambling...as long as their workers are treated with respect and earn a fair wage. If those 4 Tribes would stop fighting their workers right to organize. If those Tribes can spend money in our political system...they can give their workers the same rights all other Californians have. Hope that clarrified my earlier comments.
For more great arguements against Prop 94-97, check out www.nounfairdeals.com
Posted by: Steve Valkenburg at January 6, 2008 05:46 PM
The gaming money has, however, allowed many California Native Americans to ensure that their cultural history lives. That is a positive.
Posted by: Indigenous Activist at January 6, 2008 05:51 PM
IM voting no 94-97
Posted by: rymc at January 6, 2008 11:21 PM
On Labor
The updated compacts preserve the right of Indian casino employees to be represented by unions chosen through secret ballots. Employees have rights to organize under the Tribal Labor Relations Ordinance authored by the office of former Sen. John Burton and accepted by Organized Labor in the existing compact. There is absolutely NOTHING in the updated compacts that alters these rights.
On Non-Gaming Tribes
These agreements also address the concerns that have been raised about the RSTF and the Indian Gaming Special Distribution Fund. The four tribes have committed, as they have for the last decade, to ensure every non-gaming tribe in California continues to receive $1.1 million from the RSTF.
That is why, unlike the compact amendments that were approved in 2004, these four compact amendments all specifically require that if there are shortfalls in the RSTF, the State Gaming Agency must use as much of the money that otherwise would be paid into the State's General Fund.
Posted by: John Gomez at January 7, 2008 09:42 AM
John Gomez doesn't mention that the compacts let only the tribes themselves determine whether tribal casino employee rights are violated, a problem that disenrolled Pechanga members should understand well.
The compacts put tribes in the position of judge, jury, and executioner with respect to employee rights, grievances and protections. Californians deserve better and the Big 4 tribes can certainly afford it.
Posted by: Cal at January 7, 2008 04:09 PM
I am not against the tribes having more machines and building wealth. However I am against the fact that Morongo does not honor child support for their children. My sons father is a Morongo tribal member and owes me over 50K in back child support. I cannot collect as Morongo does not honor state court orders. Anyone know how to get a federal court order for child support? Dad lives high on the hog, 2 race cars, 4 boats, 2 trucks, dune buggies, ski doos etc.etc... and gambling, alcohol, drugs, warrants, womanizing....
Where are the morals?
I live hand to mouth every day. But I am smart, plant my fruits and vegetables, don't use gas except for work and school, cook meals, and do what I can to survive. God helps me and hopefully he will give me an answer to this mess.
I have written everyone from our President, congressmen, govenor, papers, tribe, CSS, no one wants to address this, or don't know how. Too much money involved. Morongo can keep contributing to whatever, but what about their decendants?
Posted by: mad mom at April 9, 2008 12:44 PM
Sorry, comments are temporarily disabled. We're doing a bit of server maintenance on the commenting area. We'll be back up and running shortly. Thank you for your patience.
Get Email Updates
Want the California Progress Report by email? Once a week, we'll send you the latest and greatest headlines.
© 2008 California Progress Report Our copyright and fair use policy.
Powered by Mandate Media. Logo design by Jane Norling.
RSS 