The political economy of American Indian gaming

Annual Review of Law and Social Science

Volumn 4, Issue , 2008, Pages 63-82

  Cornell, Stephen ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA   (United States)

Author keywords

Economic development; Gambling; Tribal sovereignty

Indexed keywords

EID: 57649223711     PISSN: 15503585     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.1146/annurev.lawsocsci.4.110707.172343     Document Type: Article

References (77)

1. Anders GC. 1996. Native American casino gambling in Arizona: a case study of the Fort McDowell Reservation. J. Gambling Stud. 12(3):253-67
2. Anders GC. 1998. Indian gaming: financial and regulatory issues. Ann. Am. Acad. Polit. Soc. Sci. 556:98-108
3. Baxandall P, Sacerdote B. 2005. The casino gamble in Massachusetts: full report and appendices. Work. Pap. Rappoport Inst. Greater Boston, Harvard Univ., Cambridge, MA
4. Bryan v. Itasca County, 426 U.S. 373 (1976)
5. California v. Cabazon Band of Mission Indians, 480 U.S. 202 (1987)
6. Cattelino JR. 2004. Casino roots: the cultural production of twentieth-century Seminole economic development. In Native Pathways: American Indian Culture and Economic Development in the Twentieth Century, ed. B Hosmer, C O'Neill, pp. 66-90. Boulder: Univ. Press Colo.
7. Cattelino JR. 2005. Tribal gaming and indigenous sovereignty, with notes from Seminole country. Am. Stud. 46(3/4):187-204
8. Cattelino JR. 2006. Florida Seminole housing and the social meanings of sovereignty. Comp. Stud. Soc. Hist. 48(3):699-726
9. Cattelino JR. 2008. High Stakes: Florida Seminole Gaming and Sovereignty. Durham, NC: Duke Univ. Press
10. Cordeiro EE. 1992. The economics of bingo: factors influencing the success of bingo operations on American Indian reservations. In What Can Tribes Do? Strategies and Institutions in American Indian Economic Development, ed. S Cornell, JP Kalt, pp. 205-38. Los Angeles: Am. Indian Stud. Cent., UCLA
11. Cornell S, Jorgensen M, Rainie SC, Record I, Seelau R, Starks RR. 2007. Per Capita Distributions of American Indian Tribal Revenues: A Preliminary Discussion of Policy Issues. Tucson: Nativ. Nations Inst. Leadersh. Manag. Policy, Univ. Ariz. Accessed Jan. 7, 2008. http://www.arizonanativenet.com/ pdfy2007-11-09-NNU-Per-caps-paper-for--NCAI-FINAL.pdf
12. Cornell S, Kalt J, Krepps M, Taylor J. 1998. American Indian Gaming Policy and Its Socio-Economic Effects: A Report to the National Gambling Impact Study Commission. Cambridge, MA: Econ. Res. Group
13. Cornell S, Taylor JB. 2001. An Analysis of the Economic Impacts of Indian Gaming in the State of Arizona: A Report to the Arizona Indian Gaming Association. Tucson: Udall Cent. Stud. Public Policy, Univ. Ariz.
14. Costello EJ, Compton SN, Keeler G, Angold A. 2003. Relationships between poverty and psychopathology: a natural experiment. JAMA 290(15):2023-29
15. Cozzetto DA. 1995. The economic and social impacts of Indian gaming: the case of Minnesota. Am. Indian Cult. Res. J. 19(1):119-31
16. Culin S. 1992 (1907). Games of the North American Indians, Vol. 1: Games of Chance. Lincoln: Univ. Nebraska Press
17. Darian-Smith E. 2004. New Capitalists: Law, Politics, and Identity Surr-ounding Casino Gaming on Native American Land. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thomson
18. Fenelon J. 2002. Dual sovereignty of Native nations, the United States, and traditionalists. Humboldt J. Soc. Relat. 27(1):106-45
19. Fletcher MLM. 2007. Bringing balance to Indian gaming. Harvard J. Legis. 44(1):39-95
20. Gabriel K. 1996. Gambler Way: Indian Gaming in Mythology, History and Archeology in North America. Boulder, CO: Johnson Books
21. Gardner L, Kalt JP, Spilde KA. 2005. AnnotatedBibliography: The Social and Economic Impacts of Indian and Other Gaming. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Proj. Am. Indian Econ. Dev., Harvard Univ.
22. Gerstein D, et al. 1999. Gambling Impact and Behavior Study: Report, to the National Gambling Impact. Study Commission. Chicago: Natl. Opin. Res. Cent.
23. Getches DH, Wilkinson CF, Williams RAJr. 2005. Cases and Materials on Federal Indian Law. St. Paul, MN: Thomson West. 5th. ed.
24. Giago T. 2007. The never-ending fight to defend sovereignty. Huffmgton Post, May 28. Accessed Jan. 8,2008. http://www.huiifingtonpost.eom/tim- giago/the-neverending-fight-to.b.49616.html
25. Gold S. 2006. Two tiny tribes lost their bet. LA Times, Oct. 16, p. B1
26. Goldberg C, Champagne D. 2002. Ramona redeemed? The rise of tribal political power in California. Wicazo Sa Rev. 17(1):43-63
27. Gonzales AA. 2003a. American Indians: their contemporary reality and future trajectory. In Challenges for Rural America in the Twenty-First Century, ed. DL Brown, LE Swanson, pp. 43-56. University Park: Penn. Univ. Press
28. Gonzales AA. 2003b. Gaming and displacement: winners and losers in American Indian casino development. Int. Soc. Sci. J. 55(1):123-33
29. Gonzales AA, Lyson TA, Mauer KW. 2007. What does a casino mean to a tribe? Assessing the impact of casino development on Indian reservations in Arizona and New Mexico. Soc. Sci. J. 44:405-19
30. Grant KWII, Spilde KA, Taylor JB. 2003. Social and economic consequences of Indian gaming in Oklahoma. It. Occas. Pap. Nativ. Aff. #2003-04, Nativ. Nations Inst. Leadersh. Manag. Policy, Univ. Ariz., Tucson, Harvard Proj. Am. Indian Econ. Dev., Harvard Univ., Cambridge, MA
31. Grinols EL. 2001. Cutting the Cards and Craps: Right Thinking about Gambling Economics. Urbana-Champaign: Univ. 111. Coll. Bus.
32. Harvard Proj. Am. Indian Econ. Dev. 2000. Honoring Nations, 2000: Tribal Governance Success Stories. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Proj. Am. Indian Econ. Dev., Harvard Univ.
33. Harvard Proj. Am. Indian Econ. Dev. 2003. Honoring Nations, 2003: Celebrating Excellence in Tribal Government. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Proj. Am. Indian Econ. Dev., Harvard Univ.
34. Harvard Proj. Am. Indian Econ. Dev. 2005. Honoring Nations: Celebrating Excellence in Tribal Governance. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Proj. Am. Indian Econ. Dev., Harvard Univ. 2005 ed.
35. Harvard Proj. Am. Indian Econ. Dev. 2006. Honoring Nations: Celebrating Excellence in Tribal Governance. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Proj. Am. Indian Econ. Dev., Harvard Univ. 2006 ed.
36. Harvard Proj. Am. Indian Econ. Dev. 2008. The State of the Native Nations: Conditions under U.S. Policies of Self-Determination. New York: Oxford Univ. Press
37. Harvey S. 2000. Winning the sovereignty jackpot: the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act and the struggle for sovereignty. SeeMullis & Kamper 2000, pp. 14-34
38. Indianz.com. 2006. Supreme Court won't hear Pechanga membership case. Indianz.com, May 23. Accessed Jan. 8, 2008. http://www.indianz. com/News/2006/014103.asp
39. Jojola T, Ong P. 2006. Indian gaming as community economic development. In Jobs and Economic Development in Minority Communities, ed. P Ong, A Loukaitou-Sideris, pp. 213-31. Philadelphia, PA: Temple Univ. Press
40. Jorgensen JG. 2000. Gaming and recent American Indian economic development. See Mullis & Kamper 2000, pp.96-107
41. Jorgensen M, Rainie SC, Seelau R, Starks RR, Villagrana L. 2008. Citizen Use of Per Capita Distributions: A Report to the Grand Traverse Band of Ottawa and Chippewa Indians. Tucson: Nativ. Nations Inst. Leadersh. Manag. Policy, Univ. Ariz.
42. Kershaw S. 2006. Through Indian lands, drugs' shadowy trail. NY Times, Feb. 2, p. A-1
43. Light SA, Rand KRL. 2005. Indian Gaming and Tribal Sovereignty: The Casino Compromise. Lawrence: Univ. Press Kansas
44. Light SA, Rand KRL. 2006. The 'tribal loophole': federal campaign finance law and tribal political participation after Jack Abramoff. Gaming Law Rev. 10(3):230-39
45. Light SA, Rand KRL, Meister AP. 2004. Spreading the wealth: Indian gaming and revenue-sharing agreements. N. D. Law Rev. 80(4):657-79
46. Longwitz TE. 2003. Indian gaming: making a new bet on the legislative and executive branches after IGRA's judicial bust. Gaming Law Rev. 7:197-204
47. Marks M, Spilde Contreras K. 2007. Lands of opportunity: social and economic effects of tribal gaming on localities. Policy Matters 1(4):1-11
48. Meister A. 2007. Casino City's Indian Gaming Industiy Report. Key Findings. Newton, MA: Casino City Press. Accessed Nov. 30, 2007. http://casinocitypress.com/indiangaming/indiangamingreport
49. Mille Lacs Band of Ojibwe. 2007. Fact Sheet: Economic Development by the Mille Lacs Band of Ojibwe as of October 2007. Onamia, MN: Mille Lacs Band of Ojibwe. Accessed June 17, 2008. http://www. millelacsojibwe.org/ econdevelopment.asp
50. Mullis A, Kamper D. 2000. Indian Gaming: Who Wins? Los Angeles: Am. Indian Stud. Cent., UCLA
51. Murray J. 1993. Economic Impacts of Wisconsin Winnebago Gaming Enterprises. Madison: Univ. Wis.-Extension
52. National Research Council. 1999. Pathological Gambling: A. Critical Review. Washington, DC: Natl. Acad. Press
53. Nelson DJ, Erickson HL, Langan RJ. 1996. Indian Gaming and Its Impact on Law Enforcement in Wisconsin. Madison, WI: API Consult. Serv.
54. NIGA Library. 2008. Indian gaming facts. Washington, DC: Natl. Indian Gaming Assoc. Accessed June 17, 2008. http://www.indiangaming.org/ library/indian-gaming-facts/index.shtml
55. NIGC. 2006. NIGC Tribal gaming revenues. Washington, DC: NIGC. Accessed Jan. 6, 2008. http://www. nigc.gov/Portals/0/NIGC%20Uploads/ Tribal%20Data/gamingrevenues2006.pdf
56. Pasquaretta P. 2003. Gambling and Survival in Native North America. Tucson: Univ. Ariz. Press
57. Rand KRL. 2007. Caught in the middle: how state politics, state law, and state courts constrain tribal influence over Indian gaming. Marquette Law Rev. 90:971-1008
58. Rand KRL, Light SA. 2006a. How Congress can and should 'fix' the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act: recommendations for law and policy reform. Va. J. Soc. Policy Law 11(Spring):396-473
59. Rand KRL, Light SA. 2006b. Indian Gaming Law and Policy. Durham, NC: Carolina Acad. Press
60. Rausch C. 2007. The problem with good faith: the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act a decade after Seminole. Gaming Law Rev. 11 (August):423-35
61. Sahlins M. 2000. What is anthropological enlightenment? Some lessons of the twentieth, century. In Culture in Practice: Selected Essays, ed. M. Sahlins, pp. 501-26. New York: Zone Books
62. Sallaz JJ. 2006. The making of the global gaming industry: an application and extension of field theory. Theory Soc. 35:265-97
63. Seminole Tribe of Florida v. Florida, 517 U.S. 44 (1996)
64. Serres C. 2007. High-stakes gamble. StarTribune.com (Minneapolis-St. Paul), Nov. 4. Accessed Dec. 2, 2007. http://www. startribune.com/535/story/1525987.html
65. Skibine AT. 2000. Cabazon and its implications for Indian gaming. See Mullis & Kamper 2000, pp. 67-71
66. Skopek TA, Engstrom R, Hansen K. 2005. All that glitters... The rise of American Indian tribes in state political behavior. Am. Indian Cult. Res. J. 29(4):45-58
67. Staudenmaier HM. 2003/2004. Off reservation Native American gaming: an examination of the legal and political hurdles. Nev. Law J. 4(Winter):301-19
68. Taylor JB. 2005. Indian Self-Government in Washington. Vol. I: Tribal Self-Government and Gaming Policy: The Outcomes for Indians and Washington State. Cambridge, MA/Olympia, WA: Taylor Policy Group/Wash. Indian Gaming Assoc.
69. Taylor JB. 2006. Indian Self-Government in Washington. Vol. II: The Character and Effects of the Indian Economy in Washington State. Cambridge, MA/Olympia, WA: Taylor Policy Group/Wash. Indian Gaming Assoc.
70. Taylor JB, Kalt JP. 2005. American Indians on Reservations: A Databook of Sodoeconomic Change between the 1990 and 2000 Censuses. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Proj. Am. Indian Econ. Dev., Harvard Univ.
71. Taylor JB, Krepps MB, Wang P. 2000. The National Evidence on the Socioeconomic Impacts of American Indian Gaming on Non-Indian Communities. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Proj. Am. Indian Econ. Dev., Harvard Univ.
72. Tsosie R. 1997. Negotiating economic survival: the consent principle and tribal-state compacts under the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act. Ariz. State Law J. 29:25
73. Walker DM. 2007. Problems in quantifying the social costs and benefits of gambling. Am. J. Econ. Soc. 66(3):609-45
74. Washburn KK. 2001. Recurring problems in Indian gaming. Wyoming Law Rev. 1:427-44
75. Washburn KK. 2004. Federal law, state policy, and Indian gaming. Nev. Law J. 4(Winter):285-300
76. Washburn KK. 2008. The legacy of Bryan v. Itasca County: how a $147 county tax notice helped bring tribes $200 billion in Indian gaming revenue. Minn. Law Rev. 92(4):919-70
77. Wilkins D. 2006. Banishment and disenrollment in Indian country. Indian Country Today, Aug. 25