Gaming tribes in the U . S . are ambivalent about the prospect of sports betting . Various states have begun to look at legalizing it , or have already done so . They like the additional revenues , but are leery of about the possibility that grasping it will give the states inroads to dilute existing exclusivity agreements and their sovereign status .
Many tribes believe they already have an exclusive right to offer sports betting , guaranteed to them by their gaming compacts . Opponents of this attitude point out that few compacts actually mention sportsbooks , which only became legal in 2018 , when the Supreme Court lifted the federal ban .
Tribes that insist their monopoly includes sports betting have put the brakes on its legalization , and given that tribal gaming often powers one of the biggest lobbying groups in a state , lawmakers pay attention to their concerns .
Yet tribes question the value of sports betting mobile apps , even though that technology is a natural progression , and , as has been shown in New Jersey , is where the most profits are made . They are skeptical , even when the apps are anchored in a tribal casino . Since many tribal casinos are remotely located , tribes fear that if customers can bet remotely , they will be less likely to visit the bricks-and-mortar properties .
Case in point , tribes in Minnesota are concerned that sports wagering apps will discourage foot traffic to their casinos . John McCarthy , executive director of the Minnesota Indian Gambling Association told Sports Handle , “ Our major concern is the mobile gambling . We ’ ve been fighting that forever . Why would you get up on a 20-below-zero-day and come out to the casino when you could just sit at home ?
“ We ’ re not opposed in any way to sports betting as an activity ,” he said , “ but we are concerned about what mobile leads to .”
The association ’ s position is that any mobile gaming is a negative . And since many tribes depend on the casino to fund their government , provide services and give them a sense of pride , this is a major concern . They have the attitude that once the camel ’ s nose is under the tent , the tent will collapse .
Moreover , according to McCarthy , the monetary benefits from sports betting are comparatively not that great . “ We don ’ t think it ’ s a huge amenity ,” he said . “ We ’ ve seen how it works . The first thing that starts to go is the live racing at racinos . Then they go back to the legislature and say , ‘ We ’ re not quite making it , we really need some machines ,’ and then other groups come in and say , ‘ Well , you ’ re bailing them out , I ’ m a farmer , so why don ’ t you bail me out ?’”
‘ The Strongest Opportunity ’?
This attitude isn ’ t shared by the Pequot and Mohegan tribes , which operate two of the largest casinos in the world , in Connecticut . At a recent legislative hearing , the Mashantucket Pequot Tribal Nation , owner of Foxwoods Resort Casino , sent a written statement that said , “ As we see it , the strongest opportunity for the state is in legalizing statewide iGaming , another activity that is currently operating for Connecticut residents in the black market today .” It added , “ The tribes believe sports gambling , daily fantasy sports betting and iGaming fall under the exclusivity agreement .”
Washington ’ s tribes have taken the same stance . But in that state , a tribal-only bill drew major opposition , and many other interests insisted that they wanted to be included , such as taverns , card rooms , OTBs and racetracks .
Rep . Eric Pettigrew ’ s HB 1975 would limit sports betting to reservations . He declined to add racetracks or card rooms / mini-casinos , arguing that the voters who authorized tribal gaming showed they only wanted
Tribal officials got together last year to consider the issue of sports betting in Indian Country at the Santa Ana Star casino in New Mexico
gaming at designated places . Pat LePley , president of the Washington Horsemen ’ s Benevolent and Protective Association , told lawmakers , “ If we ’ re left behind and not allowed to add to our toolbox as tribes are trying to do here , you won ’ t fatally kill us right away . But you ’ ll wound us so badly that we ’ re going to die and go away pretty soon .”
Although many tribes do claim exclusivity in all forms of gaming , their argument is complicated by the fact that no existing compacts address sports betting by name . They argue that “ sports betting ” is embraced by the existing language , even if not named explicitly .
As with the Minnesota tribes , the Washington gaming tribes also worry about mobile apps undercutting their efforts to attract visitors to their brickand-mortar properties . Washington is one of the largest tribal gaming states after Oklahoma , California and Minnesota .
Jerry Allen , a tribal elder of the Jamestown S ’ Klallam Tribe in Washington and a former head of the state ’ s tribal gaming association , said , “ We want the traffic it generates . The Nevada and New Jersey sports betting model still works , but at some point you have to drive people into your brick-and-mortars . Making sports betting too easy by putting it in convenience stores and the like , as Oregon has done , into the same kiosks with their daily keno game , creates a different problem .”
Puyallup Chairman David Bean told lawmakers that Indian tribes have been “ trusted partners ” who offer a safe , fair and controlled environment .
“ The legislation benefits all of Washington , because tribal gaming benefits tribal and non-tribal communities alike ,” said Bean . “ You know us . This is our shared homeland . We live here . We work here . We invest our resources here in Washington . And we ask that you adopt an approach to sports betting that maximizes the benefits to people and communities here in Washington .”
Maverick Gaming owner Eric Persson — who owns 19 of the total 44 card room casinos , the largest group of commercial casinos in the state — is backing a rival bill that is currently spinning its wheels in both the House and Senate . Persson is a Washington native , but has been building a rapidly expanding empire of casinos that now includes four states . His bill would allow sports betting at a variety of venues , including tribal , racetracks and card room casinos . He claims it would bring in $ 50 million annually in state revenue . He also argues that his small , intimate card rooms don ’ t pose a threat to Indian casinos , since they attract a different set of patrons .
So , sports betting in Indian Country will have a variety of outcomes , but tribes want to be assured that their monopoly on gambling in various states — and their sovereign status — is never threatened .
20 TRIBAL GOVERNMENT GAMING 2020