http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/opinion/256469_trahant22.html

Sunday, January 22, 2006

Today's Custer wears a different hat

By MARK TRAHANT
SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER EDITORIAL PAGE EDITOR

The Wild West Show lives. The headline-grabbing "re-enactment" of real,
actual history has debuted on a 21st century stage.

A century ago, the show was called Buffalo Bill's Wild West and Congress of
Rough Riders of the World. The 21st century theater of the absurd is just
called "Congress." But some elements of the plot are the same -- a twisted
narrative about America's native peoples and Washington corruption. Jack
Abramoff plays an economic version of Gen. George Armstrong Custer, an
obscene caricature that abuses national policy. He's the corrupt agent
stealing Indian lands all over again (this time in the guise of lobbying
Congress).

Newspapers fall into the old story line, too, reducing a complicated plot
into a simple yarn, making it easy for readers to conclude that American
Indians and their governments are to blame for the whole mess.

It's like Buffalo Bill Cody's show because so much of the real history is
replaced by basic misunderstandings about tribal communities -- and
especially confusion about Indian gaming.

Columnist Star Parker says, "The Indian gambling industry is another
grotesque product of ill-conceived social engineering. The Indian Gaming
Regulatory Act passed by Congress in 1988 was supposedly going to generate
new economic opportunities for American Indians by staking out a piece of
regulatory- and tax-protected turf for casinos operated by tribes."

Rich Lowry of the National Review writes that this scandal is an example of
how the "Indian casino business is flagrantly detached from its original
justification of letting supposedly sovereign nations govern themselves on
their own land."

I was writing about the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act in 1988 -- and the new
version of history is exactly backward. The fact is that a few tribes that
were involved in gaming won a Supreme Court case -- and Congress could not
wait to roll back that victory. I remember interviewing many members of
Congress who warned tribes had better "get on board" with the legislation
or it would be enacted anyway. The tribes who supported the legislation saw
it as a compromise, fearing that Congress would wipe out the court ruling.

Even the media saw it that way then. Here's a paragraph from The
Philadelphia Inquirer shortly before the act was passed: "Gambling on
Indian reservations, a booming business of bingo parlors and small casinos,
would be subject to new federal and state regulation under a bill passed by
the Senate last week."

Indian gaming was to be regulated. No more unregulated casinos -- and the
new law would force tribes to partner with state governments for that
regulatory process to work.

But the narrative of Indian gaming as a "gift" from Washington makes it
easier for the discourse about the Abramoff scandal to become a
blame-the-Indian story; sort of a, look what we gave the tribes, and look
what they've done now.

Indian gaming is not a perfect industry. There have been -- and will
continue to be -- missteps and sometimes criminal conduct. But is that any
different from any other industry where there's access to money? There are
tribal gaming operations that are first-rate, some not so good and some
with significant problems -- same as any other business enterprise.

Consider just how much is spent by tribal gaming interests lobbying --
about $7.2 million in 2004. Recent figures from the Center for Responsive
Politics show that as an industry, Indian gaming spends less lobbying than
other casino interests (about $11 million) and less than any other
significant economic interest, such as car dealers ($8.2 million).

But there are significant differences between tribal gaming and any other
industry -- differences that ought to be a part of our political discourse.

The stockholders of tribal casinos are the tribal members -- and that means
a community shares the benefits of success. A good example is the new
Muckleshoot Tribal Health Center in Auburn.

There are some tribal casinos that are huge -- and hugely profitable. And
that notion has captured the floorshow in Congress. But the vast majority
of tribal casinos across the country are more important because they create
jobs, not enormous profits. This is one reason why most Americans have been
so supportive of the expansion of tribal gaming: We like the idea that jobs
are being created on reservations (no easy task). Whether by ballot -- or
more often, voting by participation -- most Americans say tribal gaming, on
balance, is a good thing.

And even a story as sordid as the Abramoff scandal should not be able to
change that perception.

Mark Trahant is editor of the editorial page. His email:
marktrahant@....