Suspension of off-reservation casinos urged

By Tom Strode - Oct 31, 2005 - comment

Opponents of gambling expansion are calling for a two-year moratorium on government permits for the development of off-reservation casinos.

Gambling foes from more than 20 states gathered at an Oct. 7 Washington news conference to call for the Bush administration to halt the approval of casinos off Native American reservations in order for Congress to study a 1988 law regulating Indian gambling.

An off-reservation casino, also referred to as reservation shopping, involves the purchase of non-reservation property by an Indian tribe, which asks the federal government to hold the land in trust, making it tribal land as a result. Private developers then are able to build casinos on the land. State and local laws do not apply to such casinos, which are not taxable, the opponents said.

Reservation shopping is becoming more common, gambling foes say. Bridgeport, Ct., and downtown Buffalo, N.Y., are two of the locations where Indian tribes are seeking to establish off-reservation casinos, they say.

The proliferation of gambling is causing widespread societal problems, opponents say. These include increases in divorces, suicides, bankruptcies and property foreclosures.

“It is crucial for the United States to have some time to assess the impact of more gambling expansion on our nation,” said Barrett Duke, the ERLC’s vice president for public policy and research. “We must have time to assess any new gambling expansion, for once it starts, history teaches us it is nearly impossible to turn back.

“Already, we see gambling interests taking advantage of the tragedies on the Gulf Coast,” Duke said. “I, for one, believe we have too much gambling already in our nation, and we are paying a terrible price for every dollar that gambling brings in.”

The Bush administration has proposed tax breaks for casinos as part of the economic recovery package for Gulf Coast states in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. Rep. Frank Wolf, R.-Va., spoke against the plan from the floor of the House of Representatives Sept. 22 and sent a letter to President Bush protesting the idea.

“I do not have the words to express the depth of my disappointment” with such a plan, Wolf said in his letter. “This special interest incentive would be a disgrace. I trust you will do the right thing and make sure federal resources go to the poor, the needy and the vulnerable and not the gambling interests who already have insurance to cover catastrophic events like hurricanes.”

Further Learning

Learn more about: Family, Addictions, Gambling

Post a Comment




Notify me of follow-up comments?

Before You Submit Your Comment (below), Read This:

Thank you for your interest in the ministry of the Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission (SBC).

Comments are moderated to preserve the family-oriented nature of this website and in an attempt to avoid comment spam. We welcome opposing viewpoints, and we will not turn comments away as long as your views are presented with respect to everyone.

Your comments will not appear immediately and are subject to editing or deletion. We will make every attempt to check new comments in a timely manner, though there will likely be delays on the weekends and around holidays.

Please follow the these guidelines to insure your comments will be posted:

  1. Use a real name, at least a real first name. We find folks are less-rude online when not hiding behind a screen-name.
  2. Name-calling and vulgar-language will not be tolerated. Zero-tolerance is our policy. We will not spend time editing profanity. If it contains foul language, your post will be deleted. Oh, and we decide what is and what is not vulgar.
  3. Comments must be on topic. General comments (compliments, complaints, and otherwise) are best delivered here or expressed on your own personal Web site.
  4. And please, do not type in ALL CAPS. It looks like you're screaming at people.

Additionally, within Baptist polity, please recognize that many issues and decisions are addressed at a local church level. SBC denominational (national) offices have no control and desire no control over the activities of a local church. This entity is not responsible for overseeing and insuring the ethical behavior of Southern Baptist pastors or church members. If your concern involves a legal civil or criminal matter, we suggest you contact the proper local officials.

Issues involving pastoral staff or other church members, local Baptist associations or state Baptist conventions are local issues. Therefore the Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission cannot and should not address such issues. While we regret we are unable to assist you, we encourage you to seek a biblical resolution of the issue at the local church level. If your question or submission pertains to a matter covered in this text, it is likely we will not acknowledge your submission.

Other than that, we welcome you and hope to see thoughtful discussions at ERLC.com