Proposition 29 | Vote 2000 Home | Next - Prop30 | Secretary of State Home |
1998 Indian Gaming Compacts.
Referendum Statute.
Argument in Favor of Proposition 29
 

Arguments on this page are the opinions of the authors and have not been checked for accuracy by any official agency.

Proposition 29 continues a well-reasoned agreement on Indian gambling. Like it or not, federal law required our State and California Indian Tribes to negotiate gambling Compacts.

It took 17 months of intensive negotiations to develop meaningful and fair guidelines for Indian gambling, as required by federal law.

The 1998 Compacts were passed by the Legislature, signed by many Tribes, widely approved by the press, and are workable agreements for both California and the Tribes. Everyone was pleased, except a few wealthy Tribes that were operating (and still operate) illegal casinos.

Some of these wealthy Tribes spent $2.5 million in an effort to nullify the 1998 Compacts. Their ultimate goal is to bring Nevada-style casinos to California by defeating Proposition 29 (thus nullifying the 1998 Compacts) and then enacting Proposition 1A.

A YES vote on Proposition 29 represents safeguards for both California and the Tribes.
Art Croney
Executive Director, Committee on Moral Concerns

Harvey N. Chinn
California Director, National Coalition Against Gambling Expansion

Cheryl A. Schmit
Co-Chair, Stand Up for California
Proposition 29 | Vote 2000 Home | Next - Prop30 | Secretary of State Home |