Face-To-Face Talks Better For Everyone

It appears the Idaho Legislature is in a fighting mood.

A seemingly routine bill to allow the Shoshone-Bannock Tribe to engage in gaming activity may throw Idaho’s tribes into court. The bill places the federal courts instead of the governor as the final place to resolve details about gaming.

Until now, the tribes and the state of Idaho have enjoyed peaceful relations with face-to-face negotiations. But in a 12-9 vote, the House State Affairs Committee called for an immediate lawsuit in a bill approving a gaming compact with the Shoshone-Bannock Tribes. In this case, the Legislature chose court confrontation over negotiation.

Concerned that court action may spill over and affect their gaming, North Idaho tribes hoped to add an amendment to the bill to allow for a one-year moratorium on litigation. The effort failed.

North Idaho tribes returned home a bit bewildered. “I’m disappointed,” said Ernie Stensgar, Coeur d’Alene tribal chairman. “Good faith negotiations with the state of Idaho were ongoing. Our plea was to pass the Shoshone-Bannock compact legislation with the court moratorium in it.”

The Coeur d’Alenes were in the middle of negotiations on their compact with the state when this bill came to the Legislature. The hope is negotiations with Gov. Dirk Kempthorne will continue despite what the Legislature does.

The Indian Regulatory Gaming Act, which Congress passed in 1988, was designed as an economic boost to help tribes rise up from poverty. The legislation is built on the premise of respectful relations with tribes and states. It calls on tribal leaders to negotiate with governors of states to agree on how gaming activities are to be conducted. It calls on states to negotiate in good faith. In short, good faith means, “don’t play games and don’t give tribes the runaround.”

Indian gaming has been a part of life long before the area was even a territory. Tribes used gambling games as cultural exchange between other tribes, to gamble for trade goods and for fun. Stick game is a traditional gambling game. Drumming, singing and pounding on sticks make stick game a great game to watch.

Indian gaming operations have been successful in Idaho. The public supports tribal efforts to help themselves through casino gaming.

Perhaps it is because one can’t argue with success. These are not dingy, seedy operations. The Kootenai River Inn in Bonners Ferry and the Coeur d’Alene Tribal Casino are in beautiful settings. They hire hundreds of people. The employees are congenial and professional. The restaurants, gas stations and hotels that operate in conjunction with the casinos are conveniences to the traveler.

And one certainly cannot argue about the $1.4 million the Coeur d’Alenes pump directly into the local public schools.

Now, for the first time in decades, the tribes are pitted against each other. In this case, northern tribes did not support their fellow tribes from the Shoshone-Bannock with the bill as written.

Of course there have been friendly differences in other venues between tribes. Historically, though, tribes in Idaho have not abandoned unity over divisiveness for any purpose.

The northern tribes did not ask for much. They wanted an amendment to the Shoshone-Bannock bill to work out negotiated amendments to the compacts. A one-year moratorium on lawsuits seemed reasonable.

Politics is fluid. What appears to be the situation today may change dramatically over a short time. Politics and lawsuits sometimes make for unintended consequences.

Don’t be surprised if tribes take their case directly to the voters with an initiative. The conventional wisdom is that tribes enjoy about a 70 percent approval for their existing operations. The voters could approve the games tribes now play.

When Gov. Phil Batt convened a gaming commission to review Indian gaming, the commission concluded that it was best to preserve the status quo.

Sen. Jack Riggs, R-Coeur d’Alene, recently made an interesting observation at a community meeting. “The anti-gaming forces are pushing the tribes to the federal courts to make Indian casino gaming illegal. But gaming could be expanded in federal court.”

Without question, there are politicians who oppose gaming based on moral grounds. Some say the Shoshone-Bannock gaming issue is being driven by Nevada gaming interests to protect casinos along the Idaho border just south of Twin Falls.

Litigation is costly for both the state and tribes. Lawsuits never are good solutions when negotiation is readily available. Lawsuits crank up the heat and rhetoric to the boiling point. There is an adage: There is no such thing as a friendly lawsuit.