What’s So Different About Indian Gaming, Anyway?

Thread: Gambling and Risk-Taking Conference

Let’s return to our presentations at the Tahoe conference on gambling and risk-taking back in May. We promised in an earlier post in this thread to let you know which of the three main perceived vices discussed at the conference -- problem and pathological gambling, excessive or ill-informed government regulation, and Indian gaming –- was not like the others.

For many conference participants, the idea that commercial gaming required the Nevada model of regulation – enough to prevent organized crime but not enough to strangle profits – seemed to be taken at face value. As long as government created economic opportunity and then stayed out of the way, all was right with the world. But when we talked about Indian gaming, the mood was less sanguine.

A number of questions arose, even from gaming’s proponents: Why should tribes be able to use tribal sovereignty to their advantage? Isn’t it dangerous to assume that tribal sovereignty allows tribes to make collective decisions without Congress’s say-so? What about gaming’s negative impacts on local governments near a reservation? How do we know tribes use the money the right way? Shouldn’t we be wary of undue tribal political power?

Given such a mixed reaction, here’s the $64,000 question: What’s so different about Indian gaming? Check back soon and we’ll tell you.