[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 132 (Wednesday, September 24, 2003)]
[Senate]
[Pages S11914-S11915]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mrs. FEINSTEIN:
  S. 1648. A bill to modify the date as of which certain tribal land of 
the Lytton Rancheria of California is deemed to be held in trust; to 
the Committee on Indian Affairs.
  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation 
that would partially repeal language from the Omnibus Indian 
Advancement Act of 2000; language that circumvents the Indian Gaming 
Regulatory Act's common-sense protections and regulatory safeguards 
against the inappropriate siting of Nevada-style casinos.
  In 2000, a one-paragraph provision was attached to the Omnibus Indian 
Advancement Act taking land into trust for a single Indian tribe, the 
Lytton, with the aim of allowing the tribe to expedite plans to 
establish a large gaming complex in San Pablo, CA.
  The site which is not part of, nor adjacent to, any land 
traditionally held by the Lytton is, in fact, a 10-acre property which 
includes a card club and parking lot, and is located in a major urban 
area just outside of San Francisco. The process to bring this land into 
trust and sidestep gaming oversight was done without regard for Federal 
laws currently in place to regulate the siting of such a casino.
  Today California is home to 109 federally recognized tribes. 64 
tribes have gaming compacts with the State and there are 54 tribal 
casinos. With more than 50 tribes seeking Federal recognition and 
approximately 25 recognized

[[Page S11915]]

tribes seeking gaming compacts from the Governor, revenues from 
California's tribal gaming industry are expected to be the highest of 
any State's by the end of the decade.
  I have serious reservations about the expansion of Nevada-style 
gaming--with its slot machines and in-house banking--into urban areas, 
and I am particularly concerned about off-reservation gambling and 
``reservation shopping''. Off-reservation casinos often cause counties 
additional costs in public and local services, intrude on residential 
areas, and are responsible for an increase of traffic and crime within 
local communities.
  That said, under proper regulation, gaming in California has the 
potential to yield much needed benefits for tribal members in terms of 
healthcare, education and general welfare, as Congress and California 
voters intended. However, the question is not whether gaming should be 
permitted, but rather how and where. Those questions have been 
appropriately addressed by the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act.
  Without this legislation, the Lytton will be able to take a former 
card club and the adjacent parking lot as their reservation and turn it 
into a large gambling complex outside the regulations set up by the 
Indian Gaming Regulatory Act. Allowing this to happen would set a 
dangerous precedent not only for California, but every State where 
tribal gaming is permitted.
  The changes I seek today are extremely limited. This legislation 
would not reverse restoration of the tribe. It would not infringe on 
Native American sovereignty. It does not even block the casino 
proposal. It only seeks to give the State and the local communities a 
voice in the process and ensure that gaming continues to be organized 
within the framework of the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act.
  Circumventing the processes for Federal recognition of tribal 
governments and for granting land into trust presents a variety of 
serious and critical multi-jurisdictional issues--issues which can 
negatively affect the lives of ordinary citizens and deprive local 
governments of their political power to protect their communities.
  That is why I believe it is important to seek a remedy which would 
restore the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act's oversight over the matter.
  The Indian Gaming Regulatory Act has provided this Nation with a fair 
and balanced approach to Indian gaming by facilitating tribal plans for 
economic recovery without compromising a multitude of factors that 
should be taken into account when deciding on the siting of casinos. 
This law works. It is a fair process that should continue to be 
followed.
  It is simply not asking too much to require that Lytton be subject to 
the regulatory and approval processes applicable to newly acquired 
tribal lands by the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act.
  I hope my colleagues will support this legislation and I look forward 
to working with the Chairman and Ranking Member of the Indian Affairs 
Committee to pass this legislation quickly.
  I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the 
Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 1648

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. LYTTON RANCHERIA OF CALIFORNIA.

       Section 819 of the Omnibus Indian Advancement Act (114 
     Stat. 2919) is amended by striking the last sentence.
                                 ______