House committee introduces Loertscher’s bill targeting tribal gaming
House State Affairs Chairman Tom Loertscher, R-Iona, introduced a bill in his committee this morning targeting tribal gaming, seeking to alter part of the law created when voters passed Proposition 1 in 2002 to authorize tribal casinos. Specifically, Loertscher wants to add a clause banning slot machines or anything that looks or acts like one. “This is a matter of policy,” Loertscher told the committee. “We’ve been bothered by several gaming issues over the last few years. … This is a major policy thing that we need to actually address.”
Loertscher said the Idaho Constitution bans slot machines or machines that look or act like slot machines, and he said, “The courts have not addressed this issue, as far as I know.”
But House Assistant Majority Leader Brent Crane, R-Nampa, said after the meeting, “It’s an old fight, there’s old wounds, and it’s been to court twice, and the court has always found in favor of the tribes.” He said, “I’m not sure you’re going to fix this issue in the Idaho Legislature.”
Idaho’s Indian tribes got the ability to have casinos on their reservations when the state authorized a state lottery; under federal law, sovereign tribes can offer Class III gaming if anyone else in a state also can. That meant the tribes could offer their video gaming machines, which under federal law are the legal equivalent of the state lottery. You can read my full story here at spokesman.com.
Rep. Paulette Jordan, D-Plummer, voted against introducing Loertscher’s bill; the bill introduction was approved on a party-line vote with just the panel’s two Democrats objecting. Jordan, a member of the Coeur d’Alene Tribe, said, “The issue here is, I think, a personal matter with our chairman. I don’t know if this bill will make it out of committee.” She said Idaho’s tribes have been conducting their gaming operations strictly according to state and federal law and constitutional standards. Jordan said she’d encourage Loertscher to review the state’s gaming compacts with Idaho tribes, and federal laws including the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act.
Rep. Heather Scott, R-Blanchard, questioned Loertscher’s fiscal note on his bill, which stated, “There is no fiscal impact since there is no state or local excise tax on tribal gaming.” But under their gaming compacts, tribes donate millions in gaming proceeds to Idaho schools, and also tap that revenue source to fund their tribal government operations on their reservations. Idaho’s five Indian tribes employ thousands and are among the top 10 employers in the state.
Tyrel Stevenson, legislative director for the Coeur d’Alene Tribe, said after the meeting, “It’s going to take us some time to analyze the language, but we’re concerned about the Legislature overturning the clear will of the voters when they passed Proposition 1 in 2002.”
Two court cases tested the law that the initiative created; one, Idaho v. Shoshone-Bannock Tribes, was decided by the 9th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals in 2006; the other, Knox v. Otter, was decided by the Idaho Supreme Court in 2009. “We feel like it’s already been fought and settled,” Stevenson said.
Freshman Rep. Randy Armstrong, R-Inkom, asked Loertscher, “Is this where something like this is addressed, in the Legislature in committee, or is this … something the courts would hear and rule on that? Is that a better place than here?”
Loertscher responded, “We’re the ones that set the policy, and the courts are to interpret that as to the constitutionality.”
Rep. Christy Zito, R-Hammett, said, “I’m going to vote to move this forward simply because I don’t feel like in this short period of time, that we’re able to get the information we need to make a good solid, valid decision.”
The committee’s vote clears the way for a full hearing on the bill, should Loertscher, the committee chairman, decide to schedule one.
