PE.com - Yes on 94-97

In 1998, The Press-Enterprise, a leading provider of news and information for Inland Southern California through newspaper and magazine publishing, printing, Internet and telephone information services, created a news and information Web site called Inland Empire Online. It became the No. 1 online source of news and information for Inland Southern California. In 2001, Inland Empire Online became PE.com (www.pe.com). The following is an editorial from PE.com.

Yes on 94-97

08:30 PM PST on Thursday, January 3, 2008

The decision on Props. 94 through 97 on the Feb. 5 ballot depends on voters sorting through a battle between competing special interests to find the public's stake. One crucial point should make that task easier: California is better off with the new tribal gambling compacts these measures represent than continuing with the current agreements.

The four ballot measures are a referendum on new gambling compacts the governor and Legislature approved last year. A yes vote would ratify deals with the Pechanga Band of Luiseño Indians near Temecula, the Morongo Band of Mission Indians near Cabazon, the Sycuan Band of the Kumeyaay Nation near El Cajon and the Agua Caliente Band of Mission Indians in Palm Springs.

The new compacts would allow the four tribes, which now have rights to operate a total of 8,000 Las Vegas-style slot machines, to install another 17,000 slot machines combined. In return, the tribes would send more money to the state from gambling profits, with the payments to California growing as casinos expand.

A bid by special interests drives the campaign against the new deals. The big opposition comes from horse tracks, labor unions and two other California tribes with thriving casinos. Heading off competition for gambling business and furthering unionization make for self-serving politics, not a public-spirited agenda.

In fact, the new compacts offer considerable improvements over the 1999 agreements the tribes now comply with. For example, the four tribes combined now pay the state about $75 million a year. That figure would rise to $131 million annually under the new compacts, according to the state's legislative analyst.

The state's general fund would see an infusion of $123 million a year initially, and that number would climb as tribes added slots. A state facing a $14 billion deficit next year could use that revenue.

True, people living near tribal casinos might dread the prospect of busier casinos with more traffic. But casinos are only one part of the region's larger growth -- which will continue regardless of these propositions' fate. And the new compacts offer a much-improved method for addressing casinos' expansion.

The new agreements require the tribes to negotiate with local governments to offset the traffic, crime and other effects of casino projects, with binding arbitration if the parties cannot reach agreement.

The process is far superior to that of the 1999 compacts, under which tribes pay into a special fund disbursed to local government through a cumbersome, unreliable process involving state and tribal governments.

Approving these measures would also fill a gap in oversight. Before 2006, the federal government enforced basic standards for how tribes run games and handle money. A federal court ruling that year put that responsibility in state hands, yet California lacked much enforcement power.

So Gov. Schwarzenegger brokered side deals with the four tribes that specify the state has the authority to enforce the standards. Rejecting the compacts would also nullify those agreements, erasing a crucial deterrent to corruption.

Props. 94 to 97 offer the state a better deal than the current compacts. That advantage, set against the self-serving opposition, makes the choice clear.

Voters should say yes to Props. 94, 95, 96 and 97.

Source:
http://www.pe.com/localnews/opinion/editorials/stories/PE_OpEd_Opinion_H_op_04_ed_props94-97_1.28e94d1.html