Ed Morrissey of Captains Quarters blogs has a story on a "malfuntioning" jackpot.
http://www.captainsquartersblog.com/mt/archives/015403.php
The Pechanga Band also had a "similar malfunction" and refused to pay a jackpot
http://www.knbc.com/news/10277412/detail.html
FINALLY, word of what is going on at some tribal casinos is leaking out.
Will the story of how Pechanga has decimated their tribe get out?
Thursday, October 25, 2007
Friday, October 19, 2007
Chairman Macarro leads Incredible Shrinking Tribe
How long before Mark will be the boss of nothing?
Pechanga Tribal Chairman Mark Macarro
Anyone remember this guy from the 1990 prop. 1-A commercials? No one thought after approving tribal gaming, that Marc Macarro would kick out members of his own tribe as a result of the lucritive tribal gaming deals with the state that have turned tribal member against tribal members in over a dozen tribes accross the state.
Who thought we'd all end up here with the majority of California Indians seeing literally no effect of tribal gaming revenue 16 years after the establishment of the legislation, and no-one thought the California Indians would still be waiting for the re-distrubutions to non-gaming tribes that simply have not occoured, and as an issue, the accounting of which has not surfaced since Governor Shwarzenegger was campaigning after ousting Grey Davis and promised an accounting of the inter-tribal re-distribution fund within 90 days of his being elected. The intertribal re-distibution funds has been sitting is Sacramento waiting to be distributed to non-gaming tribes since 1991. Now it is surfacing in the news that these funds have been tallied and are being re-distibuted to counties for non-indian public services and infrastructure.
I'd "gander" that legilslators in Sacaramento NEVER had the intention that this money would EVER make it to any California Indian Families.
Pechanga Tribal Chairman Mark Macarro
Anyone remember this guy from the 1990 prop. 1-A commercials? No one thought after approving tribal gaming, that Marc Macarro would kick out members of his own tribe as a result of the lucritive tribal gaming deals with the state that have turned tribal member against tribal members in over a dozen tribes accross the state.
Who thought we'd all end up here with the majority of California Indians seeing literally no effect of tribal gaming revenue 16 years after the establishment of the legislation, and no-one thought the California Indians would still be waiting for the re-distrubutions to non-gaming tribes that simply have not occoured, and as an issue, the accounting of which has not surfaced since Governor Shwarzenegger was campaigning after ousting Grey Davis and promised an accounting of the inter-tribal re-distribution fund within 90 days of his being elected. The intertribal re-distibution funds has been sitting is Sacramento waiting to be distributed to non-gaming tribes since 1991. Now it is surfacing in the news that these funds have been tallied and are being re-distibuted to counties for non-indian public services and infrastructure.
I'd "gander" that legilslators in Sacaramento NEVER had the intention that this money would EVER make it to any California Indian Families.
CNIGA Opposes Indian Civil Rights Reform
CNIGA Opposes Indian Civil Rights Reform
I was informed earlier today that CNIGA, the Indian Gaming Lobby in California, moved and passed to oppose/object to the California Native American Civil Rights and Equal Economic Opportunity Legislative Initiative Resolution which was passed by the Native American Caucus of the California Democratic Party in July.
CNIGA members were urged to attend the up-coming Native American Caucus meeting on Friday, November 16 at 8:00 pm. CNIGA also sent out a memo to its member tribes that the Native American Caucus would be re-considering the California Native American Civil Rights and Equal Economic Opportunity Legislative Initiative resolution at the November 16 meeting.
The CNIGA memo, dated October 1, 2007, not only lists the time and date of the Native American Caucus meeting and states the caucus is expected to reconsider the Resolution, it provides this information at a time when the members of the Native American Caucus have not even been noticed of the time. place, or agenda of the Caucus meeting. We should not be surprised with this though.
Members of the Executive Board of the Caucus are also members of CNIGA and have held key positions in CNIGA. In addition, CNIGA member tribes such as Pechanga, Redding, Jamul and others are leading the way in denying basic rights to their people.
Here is a link to the CNIGA memo: http://www.electhaze.com/documents/CNIGA%20Memorandum%20Regarding%20the%20CDP%20Native%20American%20Caucus%20meeting%20Nov%20%2016th%20at%208PM%20-%202007-10-01.pdf
The link above also takes you to Elect haze, the official website of Steve Haze for Congress. Steve is the author of the Resolution and is responsible for bringing it to the California Democratic Party and Native American Caucus.
Here is the Resolution as passed by the Native American Caucus: California Native American Justice and Equal Economic Opportunity Legislative Initiative
Whereas, the Indian Civil Rights Act (ICRA) of 1968 guarantees in moral, ethical and legal spirit - if not in fact - equality, fairness and justice through due process to all Native Americans in the United States and the State of California;
And whereas, California State Proposition 5 and Proposition 1A as enacted by the voters of California provided for federally recognized tribes to legally engage in gaming with the premise of equal economic opportunity for all California Native Americans;
And whereas, many members of federally recognized Indian tribes within the State of California are being de-enrolled, have been terminated under the Termination Act of 1953, are experiencing illegal enrollment moratoriums, and/or are under the threat of such procedures with their human dignity and constitutional rights denied through the absence of equitable due process and lack of meaningful recourse;
Therefore, be it resolved that the California Democratic Party recognizes that the aforementioned inequities and injustices which are being carried out against Native Americans are contrary to the longstanding values, principles, and ideals of the Democratic Party;
And be it further resolved that the Democratic Party of California supports legislative initiatives at the State and Federal level to reform the provisions of the Indian Civil Rights Act (ICRA) of 1968 to redress the human and civil right abuses of California Native Americans - and, reform California State Proposition 1A with the intent of providing equal economic opportunity for all California Native Americans.
I was informed earlier today that CNIGA, the Indian Gaming Lobby in California, moved and passed to oppose/object to the California Native American Civil Rights and Equal Economic Opportunity Legislative Initiative Resolution which was passed by the Native American Caucus of the California Democratic Party in July.
CNIGA members were urged to attend the up-coming Native American Caucus meeting on Friday, November 16 at 8:00 pm. CNIGA also sent out a memo to its member tribes that the Native American Caucus would be re-considering the California Native American Civil Rights and Equal Economic Opportunity Legislative Initiative resolution at the November 16 meeting.
The CNIGA memo, dated October 1, 2007, not only lists the time and date of the Native American Caucus meeting and states the caucus is expected to reconsider the Resolution, it provides this information at a time when the members of the Native American Caucus have not even been noticed of the time. place, or agenda of the Caucus meeting. We should not be surprised with this though.
Members of the Executive Board of the Caucus are also members of CNIGA and have held key positions in CNIGA. In addition, CNIGA member tribes such as Pechanga, Redding, Jamul and others are leading the way in denying basic rights to their people.
Here is a link to the CNIGA memo: http://www.electhaze.com/documents/CNIGA%20Memorandum%20Regarding%20the%20CDP%20Native%20American%20Caucus%20meeting%20Nov%20%2016th%20at%208PM%20-%202007-10-01.pdf
The link above also takes you to Elect haze, the official website of Steve Haze for Congress. Steve is the author of the Resolution and is responsible for bringing it to the California Democratic Party and Native American Caucus.
Here is the Resolution as passed by the Native American Caucus: California Native American Justice and Equal Economic Opportunity Legislative Initiative
Whereas, the Indian Civil Rights Act (ICRA) of 1968 guarantees in moral, ethical and legal spirit - if not in fact - equality, fairness and justice through due process to all Native Americans in the United States and the State of California;
And whereas, California State Proposition 5 and Proposition 1A as enacted by the voters of California provided for federally recognized tribes to legally engage in gaming with the premise of equal economic opportunity for all California Native Americans;
And whereas, many members of federally recognized Indian tribes within the State of California are being de-enrolled, have been terminated under the Termination Act of 1953, are experiencing illegal enrollment moratoriums, and/or are under the threat of such procedures with their human dignity and constitutional rights denied through the absence of equitable due process and lack of meaningful recourse;
Therefore, be it resolved that the California Democratic Party recognizes that the aforementioned inequities and injustices which are being carried out against Native Americans are contrary to the longstanding values, principles, and ideals of the Democratic Party;
And be it further resolved that the Democratic Party of California supports legislative initiatives at the State and Federal level to reform the provisions of the Indian Civil Rights Act (ICRA) of 1968 to redress the human and civil right abuses of California Native Americans - and, reform California State Proposition 1A with the intent of providing equal economic opportunity for all California Native Americans.
Thursday, October 11, 2007
Pechanga Sues To Keep Californians From Voting
The Pechanga Band of Mission Indians and the Morongo Band of Mission Indians, two tribes that are the target of proposed ballot initiatives to limit casino gambling, filed lawsuits Wednesday to block the referenda
The lawsuits allege that the backers of the initiatives did not have signatures supporting the measures certified on time by the state.
Pechanga, Morongo and two other tribes signed new agreements with Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger allowing them to increase the number of slot machines in their casinos.
Scott Macdonald, a spokesman for the No on the Unfair Gambling Deals campaign, which opposes the tribal deals and is funded by racetrack owners and competing tribes, said the campaign submitted about 700,000 signatures for each of the referenda by Monday, the last day of the state's 90-day deadline.
However, the tribes say in their lawsuits that proponents of the referenda missed the deadline because the signatures should have been turned in and certified by the secretary of state on Monday.
"We believe the (state) Constitution is crystal clear," said Roger Salazar, a spokesman for the Coalition to Protect California's Budget and Economy, which supports the tribal deals. Those "pushing the referenda to cancel the state's Indian gaming agreements had 90 days to collect, submit and have the signatures they paid for verified and certified by the secretary of state. They did not, therefore the referenda are invalid."
Nicole Winger, a spokeswoman for Secretary of State Debra Bowen, said her office operates under a 1998 court ruling that said signatures submitted to the state before the 90-day deadline can be counted. The time it takes the state to verify the signatures does not count against the 90-day clock, she said.
"The current and three prior secretaries of state have followed the same process since that ruling from the bench," Winger said.
The 1998 ruling was issued in a case involving the Agua Caliente Band of Mission Indians, which was seeking to qualify an initiative. The Agua Caliente band, which owns two casinos near Palm Springs, is one of the four tribes targeted by the referenda.
Macdonald called the lawsuits "frivolous."
"This misguided and ill-fated lawsuit is just another example of how desperate the big four tribes are to keep California voters from having their say on these unfair gambling deals," he said.
Salazar said the legal question over what must be completed in the 90-day signature period has not been settled.
"The question has never been fully examined," he said. "In the case (that opponents of the agreements) are referring to, the judge didn't even put the ruling in writing. We believe the language in the Constitution is clear, and that the court's ruling will be in our favor."
The four tribes have said that their agreements, also called compacts, would generate more than $9 billion over the next two decades for the state.
A nonpartisan analyst for the state Legislature said the tribes' estimates on how much the state is likely to get from the agreements appear to be unrealistic.
The compacts will allow the four tribes to add 17,000 slot machines to their casinos, a 30 percent increase in the number of slots currently operating statewide.
Macdonald and other opponents of the four compacts say the four tribes would create some of the largest casinos in the country to the detriment of racetracks, smaller American Indian casinos, local communities and workers.
Pechanga Chairman Mark Macarro said the agreements would benefit everyone.
"As we have said before, we will do what it takes to protect these important agreements, which will provide billions for California, protect the environment, local communities, patrons and workers," Macarro said.
The lawsuits allege that the backers of the initiatives did not have signatures supporting the measures certified on time by the state.
Pechanga, Morongo and two other tribes signed new agreements with Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger allowing them to increase the number of slot machines in their casinos.
Scott Macdonald, a spokesman for the No on the Unfair Gambling Deals campaign, which opposes the tribal deals and is funded by racetrack owners and competing tribes, said the campaign submitted about 700,000 signatures for each of the referenda by Monday, the last day of the state's 90-day deadline.
However, the tribes say in their lawsuits that proponents of the referenda missed the deadline because the signatures should have been turned in and certified by the secretary of state on Monday.
"We believe the (state) Constitution is crystal clear," said Roger Salazar, a spokesman for the Coalition to Protect California's Budget and Economy, which supports the tribal deals. Those "pushing the referenda to cancel the state's Indian gaming agreements had 90 days to collect, submit and have the signatures they paid for verified and certified by the secretary of state. They did not, therefore the referenda are invalid."
Nicole Winger, a spokeswoman for Secretary of State Debra Bowen, said her office operates under a 1998 court ruling that said signatures submitted to the state before the 90-day deadline can be counted. The time it takes the state to verify the signatures does not count against the 90-day clock, she said.
"The current and three prior secretaries of state have followed the same process since that ruling from the bench," Winger said.
The 1998 ruling was issued in a case involving the Agua Caliente Band of Mission Indians, which was seeking to qualify an initiative. The Agua Caliente band, which owns two casinos near Palm Springs, is one of the four tribes targeted by the referenda.
Macdonald called the lawsuits "frivolous."
"This misguided and ill-fated lawsuit is just another example of how desperate the big four tribes are to keep California voters from having their say on these unfair gambling deals," he said.
Salazar said the legal question over what must be completed in the 90-day signature period has not been settled.
"The question has never been fully examined," he said. "In the case (that opponents of the agreements) are referring to, the judge didn't even put the ruling in writing. We believe the language in the Constitution is clear, and that the court's ruling will be in our favor."
The four tribes have said that their agreements, also called compacts, would generate more than $9 billion over the next two decades for the state.
A nonpartisan analyst for the state Legislature said the tribes' estimates on how much the state is likely to get from the agreements appear to be unrealistic.
The compacts will allow the four tribes to add 17,000 slot machines to their casinos, a 30 percent increase in the number of slots currently operating statewide.
Macdonald and other opponents of the four compacts say the four tribes would create some of the largest casinos in the country to the detriment of racetracks, smaller American Indian casinos, local communities and workers.
Pechanga Chairman Mark Macarro said the agreements would benefit everyone.
"As we have said before, we will do what it takes to protect these important agreements, which will provide billions for California, protect the environment, local communities, patrons and workers," Macarro said.
Pechanga Sues to Keep Californians from Voting
The Pechanga Band of Mission Indians and the Morongo Band of Mission Indians, two tribes that are the target of proposed ballot initiatives to limit casino gambling, filed lawsuits Wednesday to block the referenda
The lawsuits allege that the backers of the initiatives did not have signatures supporting the measures certified on time by the state.
Pechanga, Morongo and two other tribes signed new agreements with Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger allowing them to increase the number of slot machines in their casinos.
Scott Macdonald, a spokesman for the No on the Unfair Gambling Deals campaign, which opposes the tribal deals and is funded by racetrack owners and competing tribes, said the campaign submitted about 700,000 signatures for each of the referenda by Monday, the last day of the state's 90-day deadline.
However, the tribes say in their lawsuits that proponents of the referenda missed the deadline because the signatures should have been turned in and certified by the secretary of state on Monday.
"We believe the (state) Constitution is crystal clear," said Roger Salazar, a spokesman for the Coalition to Protect California's Budget and Economy, which supports the tribal deals. Those "pushing the referenda to cancel the state's Indian gaming agreements had 90 days to collect, submit and have the signatures they paid for verified and certified by the secretary of state. They did not, therefore the referenda are invalid."
Nicole Winger, a spokeswoman for Secretary of State Debra Bowen, said her office operates under a 1998 court ruling that said signatures submitted to the state before the 90-day deadline can be counted. The time it takes the state to verify the signatures does not count against the 90-day clock, she said.
"The current and three prior secretaries of state have followed the same process since that ruling from the bench," Winger said.
The 1998 ruling was issued in a case involving the Agua Caliente Band of Mission Indians, which was seeking to qualify an initiative. The Agua Caliente band, which owns two casinos near Palm Springs, is one of the four tribes targeted by the referenda.
Macdonald called the lawsuits "frivolous."
"This misguided and ill-fated lawsuit is just another example of how desperate the big four tribes are to keep California voters from having their say on these unfair gambling deals," he said.
Salazar said the legal question over what must be completed in the 90-day signature period has not been settled.
"The question has never been fully examined," he said. "In the case (that opponents of the agreements) are referring to, the judge didn't even put the ruling in writing. We believe the language in the Constitution is clear, and that the court's ruling will be in our favor."
The four tribes have said that their agreements, also called compacts, would generate more than $9 billion over the next two decades for the state.
A nonpartisan analyst for the state Legislature said the tribes' estimates on how much the state is likely to get from the agreements appear to be unrealistic.
The compacts will allow the four tribes to add 17,000 slot machines to their casinos, a 30 percent increase in the number of slots currently operating statewide.
Macdonald and other opponents of the four compacts say the four tribes would create some of the largest casinos in the country to the detriment of racetracks, smaller American Indian casinos, local communities and workers.
Pechanga Chairman Mark Macarro said the agreements would benefit everyone.
"As we have said before, we will do what it takes to protect these important agreements, which will provide billions for California, protect the environment, local communities, patrons and workers," Macarro said.
The lawsuits allege that the backers of the initiatives did not have signatures supporting the measures certified on time by the state.
Pechanga, Morongo and two other tribes signed new agreements with Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger allowing them to increase the number of slot machines in their casinos.
Scott Macdonald, a spokesman for the No on the Unfair Gambling Deals campaign, which opposes the tribal deals and is funded by racetrack owners and competing tribes, said the campaign submitted about 700,000 signatures for each of the referenda by Monday, the last day of the state's 90-day deadline.
However, the tribes say in their lawsuits that proponents of the referenda missed the deadline because the signatures should have been turned in and certified by the secretary of state on Monday.
"We believe the (state) Constitution is crystal clear," said Roger Salazar, a spokesman for the Coalition to Protect California's Budget and Economy, which supports the tribal deals. Those "pushing the referenda to cancel the state's Indian gaming agreements had 90 days to collect, submit and have the signatures they paid for verified and certified by the secretary of state. They did not, therefore the referenda are invalid."
Nicole Winger, a spokeswoman for Secretary of State Debra Bowen, said her office operates under a 1998 court ruling that said signatures submitted to the state before the 90-day deadline can be counted. The time it takes the state to verify the signatures does not count against the 90-day clock, she said.
"The current and three prior secretaries of state have followed the same process since that ruling from the bench," Winger said.
The 1998 ruling was issued in a case involving the Agua Caliente Band of Mission Indians, which was seeking to qualify an initiative. The Agua Caliente band, which owns two casinos near Palm Springs, is one of the four tribes targeted by the referenda.
Macdonald called the lawsuits "frivolous."
"This misguided and ill-fated lawsuit is just another example of how desperate the big four tribes are to keep California voters from having their say on these unfair gambling deals," he said.
Salazar said the legal question over what must be completed in the 90-day signature period has not been settled.
"The question has never been fully examined," he said. "In the case (that opponents of the agreements) are referring to, the judge didn't even put the ruling in writing. We believe the language in the Constitution is clear, and that the court's ruling will be in our favor."
The four tribes have said that their agreements, also called compacts, would generate more than $9 billion over the next two decades for the state.
A nonpartisan analyst for the state Legislature said the tribes' estimates on how much the state is likely to get from the agreements appear to be unrealistic.
The compacts will allow the four tribes to add 17,000 slot machines to their casinos, a 30 percent increase in the number of slots currently operating statewide.
Macdonald and other opponents of the four compacts say the four tribes would create some of the largest casinos in the country to the detriment of racetracks, smaller American Indian casinos, local communities and workers.
Pechanga Chairman Mark Macarro said the agreements would benefit everyone.
"As we have said before, we will do what it takes to protect these important agreements, which will provide billions for California, protect the environment, local communities, patrons and workers," Macarro said.
Friday, September 28, 2007
Congressional Black Caucus host Freedmen Panel
Attorney Velie is also attorney to some disenrolled Pechanga People. Could stories of Pechanga corruption be included?
Congressional Black Caucus to host Freedmen panel Wednesday, September 26, 2007
The Congressional Black Caucus Foundation is hosting a panel on the Cherokee Freedmen in Washington, D.C., on Friday. Rep. Diane Watson (D-California) and Rep. John Conyers (D-Michigan) are convening the panel.
Watson is sponsoring a bill that would cut federal funds to the Cherokee Nation until the Freedmen are restored to citizenship. The bill has been referred to Conyers, who chairs the House Judiciary Committee. "This is a rare opportunity for advocates of the Freedmen and Freedmen descendants to gather and discuss issues of profound importance concerning the Freedmen’s rightful status as full citizens of the Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma," said Watson.
The panel takes place during the CBC's annual legislative conference at the Washington, D.C., Convention Center. It will be held from 11am to 1pm in Room 209-C. The following are slated to speak: Jon Velie, Attorney for Freedmen Eli Grayson, Freedmen Advocate Marilyn Vann, Descendants of the Freedmen of the 5 Civilized Tribes Angela Walton Raji, Historian & Genealogist Chief Joe Byrd, former Principal Chief, Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma Hilary Shelton, NAACP, Washington Bureau Rusty Brown, Attorney, Member of Delaware Tribe of Oklahoma
Congressional Black Caucus to host Freedmen panel Wednesday, September 26, 2007
The Congressional Black Caucus Foundation is hosting a panel on the Cherokee Freedmen in Washington, D.C., on Friday. Rep. Diane Watson (D-California) and Rep. John Conyers (D-Michigan) are convening the panel.
Watson is sponsoring a bill that would cut federal funds to the Cherokee Nation until the Freedmen are restored to citizenship. The bill has been referred to Conyers, who chairs the House Judiciary Committee. "This is a rare opportunity for advocates of the Freedmen and Freedmen descendants to gather and discuss issues of profound importance concerning the Freedmen’s rightful status as full citizens of the Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma," said Watson.
The panel takes place during the CBC's annual legislative conference at the Washington, D.C., Convention Center. It will be held from 11am to 1pm in Room 209-C. The following are slated to speak: Jon Velie, Attorney for Freedmen Eli Grayson, Freedmen Advocate Marilyn Vann, Descendants of the Freedmen of the 5 Civilized Tribes Angela Walton Raji, Historian & Genealogist Chief Joe Byrd, former Principal Chief, Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma Hilary Shelton, NAACP, Washington Bureau Rusty Brown, Attorney, Member of Delaware Tribe of Oklahoma
Tuesday, September 25, 2007
Pechanga: Tribal Leaders Worry about Image
As well they should. Pechanga has hurt more people than they have helped.
BOYCOTT PECHANGA
Tribal leaders worry about 'wealthy Indian' image
By: EDWARD SIFUENTES - Staff WriterPerception could damage future for tribal people, leaders say
PECHANGA INDIAN RESERVATION -- Tribal leaders said Monday they were troubled by a growing public perception of American Indians as "casino-rich" special interests.Anthony Pico, a prominent former chairman of the Viejas Band of Kumeyaay Indians in East County, said tribal governments need to take a more active role in improving their image through the media. Pico, reporters and tribal public relations officials participated in conference called Native Voices held Monday at the Pechanga Indian Reservation.
"The future preservation and prosperity of American Indians will not be decided in the halls of Congress or state legislatures, nor will it be adjudicated ... (at) the U.S. Supreme Court," he told an audience of more than 50 people. "It will be decided by the voting public in the court of public opinion."
For more than 20 years, tribes have built casinos to improve the lives of tribal members, Pico said.Tribal gambling has grown to a more than $22 billion a year industry, larger than Las Vegas and Atlantic City gambling combined, said former Sen. Ben Nighthorse Campbell, R-Colorado, who spoke at the conference.Much of that revenue is generated by a handful of the more than 400 Indian casinos, Campbell said. And though members of some tribes receive large monthly shares of the revenue, most tribal people are still living in poverty and are in need of basic government services, such as health care, tribal leaders said.Pico said lawmaker's perception of casino-wealthy Indians has been used to roll back programs and policies that have helped Indian governments, which are sovereign under the U.S. Constitution, become increasingly self reliant.In California, there are 56 tribal-owned casinos that generated an estimated $7.7 billion last year. Many of the casinos, including five in North County and one at the Pechanga reservation near Temecula, have increasingly grown to mega resorts, which have drawn criticism from neighbors over traffic and public safety concerns.Sen. Campbell told the audience that American Indians have to be better advocates for themselves. That is something that does not come easy to most tribal people, he said."We are not a people that self promote," he said.Media and government relations consultants for tribes said tribes need to be more open to reporters and to the public about their culture, history and their economic plans for the future."Now is the time for tribal people to begin educating, not just the people in Congress, which is an on-going job," said Jana McKeag, a gambling industry lobbyist. "Unless we start talking to our neighbors at home about who we are and what we're doing, we're not going to get success and progress in Washington, D.C."
BOYCOTT PECHANGA
Tribal leaders worry about 'wealthy Indian' image
By: EDWARD SIFUENTES - Staff WriterPerception could damage future for tribal people, leaders say
PECHANGA INDIAN RESERVATION -- Tribal leaders said Monday they were troubled by a growing public perception of American Indians as "casino-rich" special interests.Anthony Pico, a prominent former chairman of the Viejas Band of Kumeyaay Indians in East County, said tribal governments need to take a more active role in improving their image through the media. Pico, reporters and tribal public relations officials participated in conference called Native Voices held Monday at the Pechanga Indian Reservation.
"The future preservation and prosperity of American Indians will not be decided in the halls of Congress or state legislatures, nor will it be adjudicated ... (at) the U.S. Supreme Court," he told an audience of more than 50 people. "It will be decided by the voting public in the court of public opinion."
For more than 20 years, tribes have built casinos to improve the lives of tribal members, Pico said.Tribal gambling has grown to a more than $22 billion a year industry, larger than Las Vegas and Atlantic City gambling combined, said former Sen. Ben Nighthorse Campbell, R-Colorado, who spoke at the conference.Much of that revenue is generated by a handful of the more than 400 Indian casinos, Campbell said. And though members of some tribes receive large monthly shares of the revenue, most tribal people are still living in poverty and are in need of basic government services, such as health care, tribal leaders said.Pico said lawmaker's perception of casino-wealthy Indians has been used to roll back programs and policies that have helped Indian governments, which are sovereign under the U.S. Constitution, become increasingly self reliant.In California, there are 56 tribal-owned casinos that generated an estimated $7.7 billion last year. Many of the casinos, including five in North County and one at the Pechanga reservation near Temecula, have increasingly grown to mega resorts, which have drawn criticism from neighbors over traffic and public safety concerns.Sen. Campbell told the audience that American Indians have to be better advocates for themselves. That is something that does not come easy to most tribal people, he said."We are not a people that self promote," he said.Media and government relations consultants for tribes said tribes need to be more open to reporters and to the public about their culture, history and their economic plans for the future."Now is the time for tribal people to begin educating, not just the people in Congress, which is an on-going job," said Jana McKeag, a gambling industry lobbyist. "Unless we start talking to our neighbors at home about who we are and what we're doing, we're not going to get success and progress in Washington, D.C."
Sunday, September 23, 2007
Pechanga: A Letter to Emmylou Harris asking her not to perform
A sample of a letter toEmmylou Harris asking her not to play September 23, 2007
Re: Performing at the Pechanga Resort and Casino
Dear Ms. Harris:
Please accept this letter as a request that you decline to perform at the Pechanga Resort and Casino, which is owned by the Pechanga Band of Luiseno Mission Indians, on October 11, 2007.
Over the past 3 years, Pechanga Tribal Officials have denied and/or stripped tribal members of their basic human and civil rights and eventually stripped of the members of their tribal citizenship. Even though such actions violate tribal and federal laws established to protect individuals from "arbitrary and capricious" acts of government officials, Pechanga tribal officials have escaped prosecution by claiming immunity from suit.
As a result, nearly 400 tribal citizens have been stripped of the rights and privileges other tribal members currently enjoy. Elders and children have been cut-off from programs, health insurance and medical care have been denied, education benefits have been cut, and per capita payments have been stopped. In addition, tribal members are no longer eligible to receive federal assistance since their status as a federally recognized Indian has been taken. Pechanga is not the only place where such actions are occurring.
Sadly, California Indian Country has been over-run by gross human and civil rights violations and thousands of individual Indians have been victimized. Pechanga has most recently been surpassed by the Picayune Rancheria of Chukchansi Indians near Fresno , California .
The Chukchansi Band has reportedly rid itself off half its membership, 600 in all, with threats of more disenrollments to follow. In response to what is happening at Chukchansi, Bill Cosby recently cancelled his Labor Day weekend appearance at the Chukchansi Gold Casino (see attached story).
Please read the stories attached regarding the actions taken by Pechanga Tribal Officials to victimize their own members. These acts have been compared to cultural genocide as hundreds of Indians are being "killed-off" so that others may benefit. I hope after reading the information provided you decide to cancel your performance at the Pechanga Resort and Casino. If you need more information, would like to discuss this further, or would like to meet with those who have been stripped or denied of their basic human and civil rights, please feel free to contact me at Sincerely,
For more information contact LeeAnn Carlen at Vector Management Phone: 615.269.6600 * Email: leeann@vectormgmt.com. EmmyLou Harris is managed by Ken Levitan at Vector Management
Sunday, September 9, 2007
LA Times EXPOSES Pechanga Corruption and Massacre of their own tribe
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-pechanga9sep09,0,3518283.story?page=3&coll=la-home-center
from the Article:
But in the end it was all useless.According to records of the proceedings, the enrollment committee didn't accept the evidence.
"They referenced my study but ignored the historical record entirely," Johnson said. "Then they contrived several reasons to justify the disenrollment."They even accepted a letter from prison by former tribal chairman Vince Belasco Ibanez, who was doing time for child molestation. Ibanez told the committee the Madariagas came from the San Gabriel Mission and Paulina Hunter wasn't an Indian at all. He congratulated them for "beating these impostors and all the others too."
from the Article:
But in the end it was all useless.According to records of the proceedings, the enrollment committee didn't accept the evidence.
"They referenced my study but ignored the historical record entirely," Johnson said. "Then they contrived several reasons to justify the disenrollment."They even accepted a letter from prison by former tribal chairman Vince Belasco Ibanez, who was doing time for child molestation. Ibanez told the committee the Madariagas came from the San Gabriel Mission and Paulina Hunter wasn't an Indian at all. He congratulated them for "beating these impostors and all the others too."
Thursday, September 6, 2007
House Expresses Disapproval of Expulsion of Cherokee Freedmen
Contact: Bert Hammond(202) 225-7084Lois Hill Hale(323) 965-1422
House Expresses Disapproval of Expulsion of Cherokee Freedmen
Watson: Amendment "Demonstrates the Gravity of the Issue . . . Additional Congressional Actions May Be Forthcoming"
Washington, DC- Today the House of Representatives adopted an amendment to limit funds to the Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma if the tribe fails to uphold the membership rights of the Cherokee freedmen. The amendment was attached to H.R. 2786, the Native American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Reauthorization Act of 2007. The legislation provides housing assistance to American Indians and Alaska Natives.
During the floor debate of H.R. 2786, Congressman Mel Watt (D-NC) offered an amendment to prevent funds authorized under the act from being expended for the benefit of the Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma until it recognizes the Cherokee freedmen descendants as citizens of the Cherokee Nation. Watt's amendment was further amended by language offered by Congressman Dan Boren (D-OK) that sets aside Watt's amendment as long as the tribe's temporary injunction reinstating the freedmen remains in effect and if the Cherokee freedmen prevail in their appeal of Nation's March 3 vote rescinding the tribal membership of the Cherokee freedmen. Boren's amendment, as well as Watt's original amendment, passed by voice vote.
Congresswoman Watson issued the following statement:
"The fact that the Cherokee freedmen issue has been raised on floor of the House of Representatives demonstrates the gravity of the issue. The amendment language clearly puts Congress on record that the Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma will not be in compliance with the 1866 Treaty, which recognizes the freedmen as citizens, if it takes any action through its courts or otherwise to expel the freedmen descendants.
"The amendment also sends a clear signal that Congress will continue to monitor the situation closely. If the Cherokee Nation does not move expeditiously and in a manner indicating it will comply with its treaty obligations, Congress is poised to take stronger action.
"I remain very concerned and troubled by the conduct of the Cherokee Nation leadership. The leadership's rhetoric and actions indicate that it has no intention of seeking any accommodation with the freedmen descendants. It is my understanding that the Cherokee Nation has eliminated from its official Web page all references on how freedmen descendants can apply for citizenship. It has refused all outside requests for its current enrollment records of freedmen descendants in the Cherokee Nation. And it pointedly refers to freedmen as "non-Indians."
"Additional Congressional oversight of the Cherokee Nation is certainly merited, and significant additional Congressional actions may be forthcoming."
Find out more at the Congresswoman's official website: http://www.house.gov/watson/
Thursday, August 30, 2007
California Indian Wars: Pechanga
California Indian wars
Signature gathering for a referendum to cancel state compacts to expand tribal gambling meets opposition from four of the richest Indian casino owners in the state.
“I have seen ... near fisticuffs as people argue over these things,” Mike Arno, a consultant with a labor union representing hotel workers and a racetrack company, told the Aug. 28 Los Angeles Times. Arno referred to a political fight that might be played out in shopping centers across California in the next few months. The union, Unite Here, and the Bay Meadows Land Company have joined forces in a petition drive to qualify four ballot initiatives that would allow state voters to decide whether to cancel compacts signed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and four casino-owning Indian tribes last year. The compacts would allow the tribes to add 17,000 slot machines to their existing 8,000 in return for paying 15% to 25% of their additional profits to the state.
The benefitting tribes are the Agua Caliente band of the Cahuilla (which owns casinos in Palm Springs and Rancho Mirage), the Pechanga band of the Luiseño near Temecula, the Morongo band of Mission Indians (with a casino near Banning), and the Sycuan band of the Kumeyaay near El Cajon. The state legislature approved the compacts last month; they await approval by the U.S. Department of the Interior. Bay Meadows Land Company says the compacts have hurt business at its racetracks, Hollywood Park in Inglewood and a track near San Francisco.
Unite Here says the compacts did not include desired collective bargaining terms, like those in earlier compacts. Two Indian tribes – the United Auburn Indian Community, which owns a thriving casino near Sacramento, and the Pala band of Mission Indians, with a casino near the Pechanga operation – have together kicked in $1 million to help the referendum effort. (According to the July 28 San Diego Union-Tribune, ten years ago the Pechanga tribe financed a referendum opposing a state compact with Pala.) To save their compacts, the four tribes have begun a campaign to block referendum signature gatherers. Workers for the tribes urge people not to sign the referendum petition, or if they have signed it, to sign a form asking that their names be removed from the petition. State law allows voters to revoke their signatures from referendum petitions by filing a written request with elections officials before the signatures are turned in.
The four tribes’ apprehension may arise from what may be a change in public opinion toward Indian gambling casinos. “People have soured on the political influence of the tribes, their internal infighting, and they want to limit the proliferation of gambling,” Cheryl Schmit with the gambling watchdog group, Stand Up California, told the Union-Tribune. Bill Bengen of Dehesa Valley says his group, Residents Against Gambling Expansion, will support the ballot referendum against the Sycuan band. Bengen said Californians supported Indian gambling as a way to help tribes overcome poverty – and some have “done that grandly.” Other tribes, however, are still poor. Many El Cajon citizens oppose the Sycuan compact because it would allow the tribe to build a second casino at a former golf club owned by the tribe.
Signature gathering for a referendum to cancel state compacts to expand tribal gambling meets opposition from four of the richest Indian casino owners in the state.
“I have seen ... near fisticuffs as people argue over these things,” Mike Arno, a consultant with a labor union representing hotel workers and a racetrack company, told the Aug. 28 Los Angeles Times. Arno referred to a political fight that might be played out in shopping centers across California in the next few months. The union, Unite Here, and the Bay Meadows Land Company have joined forces in a petition drive to qualify four ballot initiatives that would allow state voters to decide whether to cancel compacts signed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and four casino-owning Indian tribes last year. The compacts would allow the tribes to add 17,000 slot machines to their existing 8,000 in return for paying 15% to 25% of their additional profits to the state.
The benefitting tribes are the Agua Caliente band of the Cahuilla (which owns casinos in Palm Springs and Rancho Mirage), the Pechanga band of the Luiseño near Temecula, the Morongo band of Mission Indians (with a casino near Banning), and the Sycuan band of the Kumeyaay near El Cajon. The state legislature approved the compacts last month; they await approval by the U.S. Department of the Interior. Bay Meadows Land Company says the compacts have hurt business at its racetracks, Hollywood Park in Inglewood and a track near San Francisco.
Unite Here says the compacts did not include desired collective bargaining terms, like those in earlier compacts. Two Indian tribes – the United Auburn Indian Community, which owns a thriving casino near Sacramento, and the Pala band of Mission Indians, with a casino near the Pechanga operation – have together kicked in $1 million to help the referendum effort. (According to the July 28 San Diego Union-Tribune, ten years ago the Pechanga tribe financed a referendum opposing a state compact with Pala.) To save their compacts, the four tribes have begun a campaign to block referendum signature gatherers. Workers for the tribes urge people not to sign the referendum petition, or if they have signed it, to sign a form asking that their names be removed from the petition. State law allows voters to revoke their signatures from referendum petitions by filing a written request with elections officials before the signatures are turned in.
The four tribes’ apprehension may arise from what may be a change in public opinion toward Indian gambling casinos. “People have soured on the political influence of the tribes, their internal infighting, and they want to limit the proliferation of gambling,” Cheryl Schmit with the gambling watchdog group, Stand Up California, told the Union-Tribune. Bill Bengen of Dehesa Valley says his group, Residents Against Gambling Expansion, will support the ballot referendum against the Sycuan band. Bengen said Californians supported Indian gambling as a way to help tribes overcome poverty – and some have “done that grandly.” Other tribes, however, are still poor. Many El Cajon citizens oppose the Sycuan compact because it would allow the tribe to build a second casino at a former golf club owned by the tribe.
Pechanga Tribal Council Sued for Civil Rights Violations.
www.pechanga.info
Attached is a media advisory sent out regarding Jeffredo et al. vs. Macarro et al. which has been filed in Federal Court and served on the Pechanga Tribal Council. The Writ alleges that the Pechanga Tribal Council committed numerous violations of the Indian Civil Rights Act of 1968 ("ICRA"), a federal law that prohibits tribal governments from violating certain civil rights such as due process and equal protection of law.
As Pechanga Tribal Officials have done before, it is a safe bet to expect the Pechanga Tribal Council to claim immunity so as to escape prosecution for violations of the ICRA. MEDIA ADVISORY Wednesday, August 29, 2007 Contact Persons: Patrick Guillory Paul Harris 415-285-1882 Federal Lawsuit Being Served on Pechanga's Tribal Council Temecula, CA- A Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is being served on the Tribal Council of the Pechanga Band of Luiseno Mission Indians. The Petition names the current members of the Pechanga Tribal Council, including Chairman Mark Macarro, as Respondents for the Tribal Council's actions in violating the Indian Civil Rights Act of 1968 ("ICRA").* The Petition was filed in Federal Court by descendants of Paulina Hunter, who was retroactively stripped of her Pechanga citizenship.
All of her descendants, numbering over 100 tribal members, have also been disenrolled from their Tribe. (Disenrollment means the stripping of their tribal citizenship, and effective banishment from their Tribe.) Pechanga Tribal officials ignored the findings of the Tribe's retained anthropologist, who concluded that Paulina Hunter was one of the original Pechanga tribal members when the Tribe was formally recognized by the U.S. Government in the 1800s. The Petition cites numerous violations of ICRA, which was passed by Congress to provide basic civil rights to Indians on Indian Reservations. It's because the U.S. Bill of Rights does not apply on reservations that ICRA was enacted; to "protect individual Indians from arbitrary and unjust actions of tribal governments." Specifically, the Tribal Council's actions denied the Hunter descendants of due process and equal protection of the laws; inflicted cruel and unusual punishment; deprived the Hunter descendants of property without due process; and violated freedom of speech protections.
The Tribal Council also refused to comply with a "duly-enacted Tribal Resolution" stopping the wholesale denationalization of its citizens. These actions also constitute a "severe and continuing detention" and "restraint on Petitioners' liberty". The Petition requests that the Court issue orders directing the Pechanga Tribal Council to free the Hunter descendants from the restraints on their liberty and to invalidate the illegal stripping of their Indian citizenship. * The case is known as Jeffredo et al. vs. Macarro et al., US District Court-Central District of California, Case # CV 07 1851 JFW (PLAX).
Attached is a media advisory sent out regarding Jeffredo et al. vs. Macarro et al. which has been filed in Federal Court and served on the Pechanga Tribal Council. The Writ alleges that the Pechanga Tribal Council committed numerous violations of the Indian Civil Rights Act of 1968 ("ICRA"), a federal law that prohibits tribal governments from violating certain civil rights such as due process and equal protection of law.
As Pechanga Tribal Officials have done before, it is a safe bet to expect the Pechanga Tribal Council to claim immunity so as to escape prosecution for violations of the ICRA. MEDIA ADVISORY Wednesday, August 29, 2007 Contact Persons: Patrick Guillory Paul Harris 415-285-1882 Federal Lawsuit Being Served on Pechanga's Tribal Council Temecula, CA- A Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is being served on the Tribal Council of the Pechanga Band of Luiseno Mission Indians. The Petition names the current members of the Pechanga Tribal Council, including Chairman Mark Macarro, as Respondents for the Tribal Council's actions in violating the Indian Civil Rights Act of 1968 ("ICRA").* The Petition was filed in Federal Court by descendants of Paulina Hunter, who was retroactively stripped of her Pechanga citizenship.
All of her descendants, numbering over 100 tribal members, have also been disenrolled from their Tribe. (Disenrollment means the stripping of their tribal citizenship, and effective banishment from their Tribe.) Pechanga Tribal officials ignored the findings of the Tribe's retained anthropologist, who concluded that Paulina Hunter was one of the original Pechanga tribal members when the Tribe was formally recognized by the U.S. Government in the 1800s. The Petition cites numerous violations of ICRA, which was passed by Congress to provide basic civil rights to Indians on Indian Reservations. It's because the U.S. Bill of Rights does not apply on reservations that ICRA was enacted; to "protect individual Indians from arbitrary and unjust actions of tribal governments." Specifically, the Tribal Council's actions denied the Hunter descendants of due process and equal protection of the laws; inflicted cruel and unusual punishment; deprived the Hunter descendants of property without due process; and violated freedom of speech protections.
The Tribal Council also refused to comply with a "duly-enacted Tribal Resolution" stopping the wholesale denationalization of its citizens. These actions also constitute a "severe and continuing detention" and "restraint on Petitioners' liberty". The Petition requests that the Court issue orders directing the Pechanga Tribal Council to free the Hunter descendants from the restraints on their liberty and to invalidate the illegal stripping of their Indian citizenship. * The case is known as Jeffredo et al. vs. Macarro et al., US District Court-Central District of California, Case # CV 07 1851 JFW (PLAX).
Friday, August 24, 2007
Did Pechanga Corruption Lead to Snubbing of Prez on the Rez?
Were many Democratic Candidates looking to avoid embarrassing questions about actions by Pechanga to disenroll 25% of their tribe? At least Dennis Kucinich had the balls to stand up against disenrollments.
http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/news/20070823/a_eline23.art.htm
Candidates snub Indian forum in Calif.
A presidential forum set for today at the Morongo Band of Mission Indians reservation in Southern California has attracted only three of the eight Democratic candidates: Bill Richardson, Mike Gravel and Dennis Kucinich.
The absence of top-tier candidates — Sens. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York and Barack Obama of Illinois and former senator John Edwards of North Carolina — shows the leading contenders continue to take the small and usually Democratic Indian vote for granted, organizers say.
"If they won't come talk to us now, they certainly won't be responsive to us if they get in the White House," said Kalyn Free, a Choctaw from Oklahoma who is organizing the Democratic forum, called "Prez on the Rez."
Top contenders said they could not attend because of scheduling conflicts. The event is the first attempt to bring a presidential debate to Indian country.
Tribes contributed $7.6 million to federal candidates in 2006, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. They spent $16.7 million on Washington lobbying last year.
"They have gone from being the poor sisters of American politics to being more politically influential," said John Kenneth White, a political scientist at Catholic University in Washington. "The challenge they've had is how to be effective politically and savvy politically."
— Diana Marrero,Gannett News Service
http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/news/20070823/a_eline23.art.htm
Candidates snub Indian forum in Calif.
A presidential forum set for today at the Morongo Band of Mission Indians reservation in Southern California has attracted only three of the eight Democratic candidates: Bill Richardson, Mike Gravel and Dennis Kucinich.
The absence of top-tier candidates — Sens. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York and Barack Obama of Illinois and former senator John Edwards of North Carolina — shows the leading contenders continue to take the small and usually Democratic Indian vote for granted, organizers say.
"If they won't come talk to us now, they certainly won't be responsive to us if they get in the White House," said Kalyn Free, a Choctaw from Oklahoma who is organizing the Democratic forum, called "Prez on the Rez."
Top contenders said they could not attend because of scheduling conflicts. The event is the first attempt to bring a presidential debate to Indian country.
Tribes contributed $7.6 million to federal candidates in 2006, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. They spent $16.7 million on Washington lobbying last year.
"They have gone from being the poor sisters of American politics to being more politically influential," said John Kenneth White, a political scientist at Catholic University in Washington. "The challenge they've had is how to be effective politically and savvy politically."
— Diana Marrero,Gannett News Service
Wednesday, August 1, 2007
Letter in Opposition to Pechanga Land Transfer
Please help to keep Pechanga from getting a reward for violating the civil rights of it's people:
August 1, 2007 Senator Dianne Feinstein VIA US Mail and Facsimile United States Senate331 Hart Senate Office BuildingWashington, D.C. 20510
Phone: (202) 224-3841Fax: (202) 228-3954
Re: HR 2963 Bill to Transfer Land to the Pechanga Band of Luiseno Mission IndiansDear Senator Feinstein: It has come to my attention that you may be considering sponsorship of HR 2963 (Issa) which would transfer land to the Pechanga Band of Luiseno Indians in Riverside County, California.
I urge you to reconsider this course of action and review the letters previously forwarded in opposition to HR 2963 (previously HR 28) as well as its predecessor, HR 3507. In addition, I would like to draw your attention to a letter dated May 10, 2006 which was your response to opposition letters addressed to you and the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, of which you were a member.
Specifically, you responded that you would “keep our concerns in mind as HR 3507 is debated in committee” and you also agreed that “Native Americans should not be denied their fundamental civil rights”- something Pechanga Tribal Officials have done on a grand scale.
While those who opposed HR 2963 were denied the opportunity to testify in opposition to the bill in the House of Representatives, I and many others would request that we be given the opportunity to meet with you or a representative of your office to discuss the implications and impacts of HR 2963. We further ask that we be given the courtesy to testify in opposition to HR 2963.
I oppose HR 2963 for several reasons. First of all, HR 2963 does not benefit all the Indians who are associated with or have ties to the cultural and sacred sites located on and within the land proposed to be transferred.
The land should be transferred to all Indians with ties to the cultural and sacred sites. If a transfer occurs that fails to include ownership and use rights for all affected Indians, especially those who have had their human and civil rights violated by actions of Pechanga Tribal Officials, the Pechanga Band will deny access to individuals who have undisputed cultural and lineal ties to the sacred sites seeking to be protected by HR 2963.
I also oppose HR 2963 based on the Pechanga Band’s actions to deprive and deny individuals of their human and civil rights. No entity that participates in, supports, or otherwise partakes in human and/or civil rights violations should benefit from the public trust. The actions taken by Pechanga Tribal Officials -denial of due process, failure to provide equal protection of the laws, establishment of ex post facto laws, etc.- mirror those which led to the introduction and passage of the Indian Civil Rights Act of 1968 ("ICRA"). As you know, the ICRA was intended to “… protect individual Indians from arbitrary and unjust actions of tribal governments” and to secure for the individual American Indian the broad constitutional rights afforded all other American citizens.
However, Pechanga Tribal officials have hid behind the Tribe’s sovereignty to escape prosecution and to prevent the victims of their actions from seeking recourse for the injury and harm resulting from the human and civil rights violations. Although the tribal officials may be immune from suit, this does not equate to innocence of action.
Additionally, I would ask you to take a hard look at lands previously transferred to trust for the Pechanga Band. Specifically, the Great Oak Ranch was transferred with the intent of protecting it and its invaluable resources from a proposed transmission line project that threatened to negatively impact the Great Oak and other resources.
The Pechanga Band spent a great amount of time and money lobbying Congress to protect the Great Oak Ranch, and it was stressed that the Pechanga Band had no intent in changing the use of the ranch. In fact, Congressman Issa introduced at least one bill to protect the Great Oak and the Great Oak Ranch from the transmission project.
Today, with the Great Oak and the Great Oak Ranch spared from the transmission line project and the property transferred into trust, a portion of the Ranch has been turned into a staging area for on-going construction projects both on the Ranch and associated with the casino complex. The character of the Ranch has been drastically changed and in no way reflects the “no change in use” mantra used by Pechanga officials in lobbying Congress, your office, and federal agencies for its protection and transfer to trust.
In light of the issues presented above, I must oppose HR 2963, and I ask to meet with you to discuss these issues
Respectfully submitted,
August 1, 2007 Senator Dianne Feinstein VIA US Mail and Facsimile United States Senate331 Hart Senate Office BuildingWashington, D.C. 20510
Phone: (202) 224-3841Fax: (202) 228-3954
Re: HR 2963 Bill to Transfer Land to the Pechanga Band of Luiseno Mission IndiansDear Senator Feinstein: It has come to my attention that you may be considering sponsorship of HR 2963 (Issa) which would transfer land to the Pechanga Band of Luiseno Indians in Riverside County, California.
I urge you to reconsider this course of action and review the letters previously forwarded in opposition to HR 2963 (previously HR 28) as well as its predecessor, HR 3507. In addition, I would like to draw your attention to a letter dated May 10, 2006 which was your response to opposition letters addressed to you and the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, of which you were a member.
Specifically, you responded that you would “keep our concerns in mind as HR 3507 is debated in committee” and you also agreed that “Native Americans should not be denied their fundamental civil rights”- something Pechanga Tribal Officials have done on a grand scale.
While those who opposed HR 2963 were denied the opportunity to testify in opposition to the bill in the House of Representatives, I and many others would request that we be given the opportunity to meet with you or a representative of your office to discuss the implications and impacts of HR 2963. We further ask that we be given the courtesy to testify in opposition to HR 2963.
I oppose HR 2963 for several reasons. First of all, HR 2963 does not benefit all the Indians who are associated with or have ties to the cultural and sacred sites located on and within the land proposed to be transferred.
The land should be transferred to all Indians with ties to the cultural and sacred sites. If a transfer occurs that fails to include ownership and use rights for all affected Indians, especially those who have had their human and civil rights violated by actions of Pechanga Tribal Officials, the Pechanga Band will deny access to individuals who have undisputed cultural and lineal ties to the sacred sites seeking to be protected by HR 2963.
I also oppose HR 2963 based on the Pechanga Band’s actions to deprive and deny individuals of their human and civil rights. No entity that participates in, supports, or otherwise partakes in human and/or civil rights violations should benefit from the public trust. The actions taken by Pechanga Tribal Officials -denial of due process, failure to provide equal protection of the laws, establishment of ex post facto laws, etc.- mirror those which led to the introduction and passage of the Indian Civil Rights Act of 1968 ("ICRA"). As you know, the ICRA was intended to “… protect individual Indians from arbitrary and unjust actions of tribal governments” and to secure for the individual American Indian the broad constitutional rights afforded all other American citizens.
However, Pechanga Tribal officials have hid behind the Tribe’s sovereignty to escape prosecution and to prevent the victims of their actions from seeking recourse for the injury and harm resulting from the human and civil rights violations. Although the tribal officials may be immune from suit, this does not equate to innocence of action.
Additionally, I would ask you to take a hard look at lands previously transferred to trust for the Pechanga Band. Specifically, the Great Oak Ranch was transferred with the intent of protecting it and its invaluable resources from a proposed transmission line project that threatened to negatively impact the Great Oak and other resources.
The Pechanga Band spent a great amount of time and money lobbying Congress to protect the Great Oak Ranch, and it was stressed that the Pechanga Band had no intent in changing the use of the ranch. In fact, Congressman Issa introduced at least one bill to protect the Great Oak and the Great Oak Ranch from the transmission project.
Today, with the Great Oak and the Great Oak Ranch spared from the transmission line project and the property transferred into trust, a portion of the Ranch has been turned into a staging area for on-going construction projects both on the Ranch and associated with the casino complex. The character of the Ranch has been drastically changed and in no way reflects the “no change in use” mantra used by Pechanga officials in lobbying Congress, your office, and federal agencies for its protection and transfer to trust.
In light of the issues presented above, I must oppose HR 2963, and I ask to meet with you to discuss these issues
Respectfully submitted,
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)