CALIFORNIANS!!! Help! How are you voting on the Gaming Props 94, 95, 96, 97?

Hubby's voting no. Best friend is voting yes. I can see both sides. Anybody got a good argument either way?

Allows expansion in four existing casinos on established tribal lands.

Increases the payments to the state from the four tribes.

Has funding provisions to smaller tribes with smaller casinos, tribes without casinos.

Includes fiscal oversight on payments to the state.

Includes environmental impact review on casino operations.

The argument that casinos are non-unionized has some merit, yet I'm unsure if federal and/or state labor law is applicable on tribal territories.

If labor is against it that works for me.
Anything that Der Gropenfuhrer and Taxpayer groups are for I'm against.
Here's another thread about it: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=141x29165

People won't have to drive to Nevada to lose their money.

Quit screwing with the Native Americans and leave them alone. They've been through enough hell.
Let them have their rewards.

otherwise NO

Partly because of the reason you gave. Partly because I favor casinos in California rather than Las Vegas, if we must have casinos, and it appears that we must.

:shrug:

Many native americans are against it. It shuts out many tribes.

these measures only benefit four tribes leaving the others out in the cold

Do the opponent's have a legitimate position?

Several people have asked me about them, and I can't figure out what's going on.

Prop 91-highway funds hijacking (from the General Fund to benefit freeway builders). Prop 92-limits community college fees (but does something weird, separating K-12 and community college funding). Prop 93-limits state legislators to 12 years total in either house (Thomas Jefferson opposed term limits as undemocratic). And four Props, 94, 95, 96 and 97-Indian Gaming (increases state revenues--and where's the next Enron who will then loot them?). (Some progressive groups say the Gaming is non-union--oppose it. Others feel we shouldn't dictate to Indians--more my feeling.)

To analyze California Feb 5 results, you will need these tools

Election Reform forum
(evaluation of CA election system, lots of Feb 5 election info/resources, and more in the comment section)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x496453

GD: Primaries (a similar post)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x4316990

GD: (national and long-term implications)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x2799968

I was stopped dead by the provision that the tribes (who would benefit) would be exempt from certain Calif. environmental protections -- i.e., they would essentially be self-policing the environmental impact of adding another 3,000/5,500 machines per club. (Think "carbon footprint": besides extra electricity used, we're talking extra toilet facilities, more cars, more pavement, more rooms... Think of everything that goes into running any casino, anywhere.)

I can elaborate if you like... Suffice to say, mine is not an anti-NA stance; I say, whatever they can do to raise themselves out of the pit we put them into, let 'em, and more power to 'em!

But that doesn't quell my environmental concerns. Let anyone who will benefit from a thing self-police, and -- as an employer once opined to me many years ago: "There's a little larceny in everyone."

91 - already resolved in the legislature, so it doesn't matter - NO
94-97 - NO!
92 - Yes because it was proposed by Community College students.

NO WAY do I support that asshat.

Those four tribes have money- look at the many HUGE
cardstock paper fliers you get from them in the mail promoting
a 'Yes' vote on these propositions.

I'm not all all certain the other tribes will get a share of the revenue.
The President of the CTA, the state's largest teacher union does not believe schools
will receive much if anything from the gambling proceeds.
He's in one of the 'No' ads.


I fear many tribes will be left out.

The big four do share revenues with the other California tribes. As to unions, that door is not completely shut in the future. BTW what the fuck has labor EVER FUCKING DONE FOR CALI NATIVE AMERICANS?!?

that many Native Americans are now facing?

For Bear Dances. I now hear some of the guys talking about bitter disputes between tribal members challenging each other's "papers". As for the state doing it, no.

I am Chiricahua Apache, the same as Cochise, and Geronimo. We are one of the most infamous tribes in U.S. history and we are not recognized by the U.S. at all.

...whatever the Indians want, I vote for it. I have to be convinced otherwise to vote against it. And on these new Props, I ain't been convinced otherwise yet. And I doubt much'll change between now and Tuesday.

not to mention the fact that they only benefit and have been agreed to by just 4 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA TRIBES WHO ARE EXTREMELY SUCCESSFUL AND WILL ADVERSELY IMPACT THE MANY NATIONS, (TRIBES), IN CENTRAL AND NORTHERN CALIFORNIA!! There are so many tribes whose rancherias, (reservations) are struggling to get a profitable casino or bingo hall off the ground to pay for everything from healthcare to housing fit for human habitation to schools, you name it. I can immediate think of at least 12 nations up here in the north who are struggling like hell to become self sustaining-the Yurok, the Nomlakis, the Atsugewi, many bands of Maidu and Miwok. Tghere's just so much more than what that damn commercial is lying about.

This is a crappy set of proposals and when I read the names of the tribes that backed that props, I immediately knew that there was a problem. There are ALL KINDS OF NATIONS up here in northern California and central California who are struggling in trying to get their casinos off the ground. This is crap and people need to look closer at this, especially considering that this is pushed by a Las Vegas casino owner and the owners of two racetracks there.

Only two gaming tribes oppose it. Please consider a yes vote.

both part of California's rich cultural life. They need in on the deal to compete/survive personally I want race tracks. Both , I believe are union represented. The Indians out here are fighting representation tooth and nail. That's why I no longer support them

Arnold lies even more than Bush does. Besides Labor unions oppose 94, 95, 96 and 97.

I'm leaning Yes. It would put us almost back to pre-Arnie days when Community Colleges were affordable. Both my daughter and I were attending CC when he upped the unit fees and the increase was notable. I believe it went from $6.00/unit to $26.00/unit. I was shocked when I registered for my two classes after the change but it didn't hurt me financially. My daughter, OTOH, had to apply for grants because she could no longer afford to attend full time.

I know, I know, the Dems are opposed.

I just think our state budget needs all the help it can get right now, and a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush. Better this deal now than a hypothetically better deal SOMEDAY in the distant future, if at all.

For the same reason - our state government needs the $.

Undecided.