Tribal coalition collects $24.6 million to battle Nevada casinos, California card clubs’ $1 million

Michelle DeArmond

Tuesday, Aug. 4, 1998 | 8:15 a.m.

SACRAMENTO, Calif. - American Indian tribes battling a coalition of Nevada casinos and card clubs over the issue of Indian casinos in California offered a glimpse into their finances with the release of documents showing the tribes had raised $24.6 million.

By contrast, the opposition group collected just $929,900 - all of it from Nevada casinos and California card clubs. With about a third of those monies going to TV stations for commercial time, the opposition group spent its entire bank account and then some.

The news Monday came after the tribes had spent weeks vilifying Nevada casinos as big-money interests bent on quashing competition from American Indian casinos. The documents showed that while Nevada casinos are involved, it's the tribes who have the most money in the ballot initiative battle that some predict will be the costliest one in the nation's history.

Already the two sides have been flooding the airwaves with inflammatory commercials about Proposition 5, which would legalize forms of gambling deemed illegal by the state.

The tribal coalition, known as Californians for Indian Self-Reliance, still had $12 million on June 30, which was the date of the last reporting period. The financial statements detailing contributions and expenditures between Jan. 1 and June 30 were mailed to the Secretary of State's office by Friday's filing deadline, but were not made available until Monday.

Daniel Tucker, chairman of Californians for Indian Self-Reliance, said the tribes spent a lot of money to get the message out.

"The cost of this campaign (is) significantly less than the lives and land that Indians have paid in the past. They pale in relation to the consequence of returning Indian tribes to a life of poverty, illiteracy and welfare handouts," he said.

The coalition spent $2.2 million for TV and radio time between April 1 and June 30, and unknown amounts since then. This followed an unprecedented $6.8 million signature-gathering campaign in the spring to get the measure on the November ballot.

The vast majority of the tribal coalition's contributions and loans have come from tribal members and tribal governments, who presumably accumulated their wealth through casinos already in operation.

Less than half of the state's 112 Indian reservations already have casinos, most of which are operating without an agreement with the governor, as required under the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act. The ballot initiative would require the governor to sign compacts that meet the tribes' approval, contrary to a compact signed with the Pala tribe that tribes across the state described as too restrictive.

Mary Ann Andreas, a tribal member who contributed $1,000, said Indian gaming is the tribes' "lifeblood."

"It is because the stakes are so high that we must spend out hard-earned money to share our real life stories with our fellow Californians," she said.

The Coalition Against Unregulated Gambling describes itself as a broad coalition of labor unions, religious groups and businesses, but apparently has been entirely financed - at least through June 30 - by gambling interests. By June 30, the coalition had spent $314,478 on TV ads, and has since increasing its TV budget to $500,000 a week.

Contributions came from - among others - Caesars ITT, which owns the elegant Caesars Palace hotel-casino on the Las Vegas Strip and donated $200,000; Beverly Hills-based Hilton Hotels Corp., which has two properties in Las Vegas and contributed $200,000; and the Primadonna hotel-casino at the California-Nevada border, which gave $200,000.

"As part of the taxed and regulated gambling industry, Nevada gaming interests helped us get this campaign started to counter the million of dollars already spent by the other side," said Frank Schubert, strategist for the Coalition Against Unregulated Gambling.

Gina Stassi, a spokeswoman for CAUG, said the campaign finance reports revealed an astonishing show of wealth by the tribes.

"If this is a David and Goliath campaign, we are David," she said. "I think the real issue here is not Indian self-sufficiency. It's about the flaws of the initiative."