The vast majority of Indian gaming ventures are small
enterprises comprised of high-stakes bingo and/or slot machines. However, due to the
lack of mandated disclosure laws for Indian tribes, accurate financial statistics
are Indian leaders, and consultants' reports written at their request, tend to emphasize the positive gains from this infusion of capital. They have many valid points, as there are many tribes that constructed new roads, schools or housing with gaming profits. In addition, many reports stress the employment gains resulting from casinos (see the National Indian Gaming Commission's STATISTICS on the subject). Like all statistics, these can be manipulated. For example, construction-related jobs are often tabulated as permanent employment gains, even though those jobs disappear once the casino is built. Few people doubt that some gain is derived from casinos, but the economic extent of that gain is heavily debated. Click HERE for an alternative data source highlighting the negative externalities of gaming, published by the United States Gambling Research Institute. Economists think of casinos as niche-filling enterprises, and Indian Reservations may be uniquely able to take advantage of this niche. Casinos are generally not desired close to population centers, so the relatively remote locations of most reservations actually work to the tribes' advantage. The true economic benefits of tribal gaming remain unclear. Some analysts believe that casinos draw resources away from their host communities by fostering problems such as fraud and compulsive gambling. However, others claim that gaming does create a net revenue stream along with increased employment opportunities by attracting desperately needed money to the reservation. Who should we believe? Both claims are correct, and enough examples exits to prove either point. To achieve a net gain, a reservation must attract visitors from beyond its borders. These visitors would not have ordinarily been on the reservations, so their money is truly an economic bonus. However, most tribes are in remote locations that are inconvenient for all but a few small nearby towns. It is doubtful whether remote reservations can realistically expect big gambling profits. After all, practically the only people to whom the casino would be convenient -- are the reservation's own members. Sometimes the most vocal opponents of reservation gaming are
state governments. Many states view tax-exempt reservation casinos as drawing
resources away, while adding nothing in return. This tense relationship produces
standoffs such as California is currently experiencing. In California, the
governor's office and the states gaming tribes reached a The federal government, though, has a different perspective. Increasing tribal revenues decreases the amount by which tribes depend on federal assistance. Thus, the government (at least superficially) tends to condone a certain extent of tribal gaming as a means to reducing its own expenditures. But for how long can the government or individual tribes depend on a continuation of gambling revenues? Remember the issue of sustainability? There are serious questions concerning whether gaming is sustainable in Indian Country. Casino success stories, such as Foxwoods, prompt other communities (both Indian and non-Indian) to consider hosting other casinos. The problem is, that the gaming industry is chasing after finite consumer resources. Current casinos draw customers from a large area, but these areas shrink with each added casino. People would not travel out to an Indian Reservation to gamble if there is a closer casino.
For these reasons, the Indian gaming industry is closely watching casino developments elsewhere. In recent years, as the popularity of gaming venues such as riverboats has soared, even the most enthusiastic supporters of reservation gaming expect the windfall to end. This means that even the most successful of tribes
must plan for economic development strategies besides gaming.
| index | non-gaming | issues | literature review | links | |
hard to find.
Successful tribes stress the importance of gaming proceeds, noting how gaming is one of
the few possibilities that tribes have to attract needed capital. That capital is
required, under federal law, to be spent in certain manners. According to the Indian
Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA) of 1988, 50 percent of gaming profits must be invested in
tribal improvements, such as infrastructure or community facilities. 
tentative resolution in March, 1998 to a gaming conflict that had been
festering for nearly a decade. The state effectively refused to sign gaming compacts
with tribes, even though over two dozen tribes had been openly flouting the state's
mandate. This indicates the enmity felt between many states and their resident
tribes. 
