I couldn't say it better than AuntyM...she has called me a bigot and racist in the past but that will not deter me from saying that the tribes do have a monopoly which is the "soveriegn nation" argument....We can't stop them because they are separate country.

The tribes like our country fine and use most of the services and splendors it provides but hide inside their "sovereign nation" when it suits them, when it pays off for them....They got half our fish by interpretation of treaties and were not satisfied so they got half of our shellfish by further and even more sympathetic interpretation of treaties. Not happy with that they turned to taking more than 50% of both and refused to accountable. Not satified with that they moved into casinoes for untold millions in profits from their newfound monopoly. And still today tribes are generally poor and plagued by alcoholism. The Muckleshoots who are swimming in cash from casino profits give hand outs to all tribal members to the tune of $2000 per month per person. Still poverty runs wild. Alcoholism is the highest per capita of any group in America. So who is getting rich? Nevada interests and the top dogs in the tribes. They can't and don't staff their casinos predominately with tribal members but with non indians.

I support !-892 for one simple reason and that is that it is one step in the right direction towards equality for all and not just for some. Not super equality for a few but simple equality for everybody.

The argument that says gambling is bad for people is correct but those who argue that line should also argue to close down the tribal casinoes before arguing to only allow tribal casinoes.

They have taken over our fisheries and soon will use their monopolistic gambling profits to buy our government as well. I would not put it past the politicians in Washington to give the tribes all our state lands so they don't get upset.

Will it ever stop? Probably when people get pissed enough.

By the way PACIFICNW...what tribe are you from?

I think Aunty M and Grandpa make very good points.



The slot machines are the biggest draw and by far the biggest money makers in casinos.

Why shouldn't non-tribal casinos be allowed to have slot machines to level playing field and be able to compete with tribal casinos?

The pie is more than big enough for everyone to get a piece.

If I-892 passes, it will lower the property taxes of every home/property owner in Washington state that normally pays them without costing the state's general fund a dime

If the Tribes paid taxes on the millions of dollars generated by slot machines, this wouldn't be be issue.

If the Tribes offered to use some of their considerable slot machine profits to lower my property taxes or just paid state, local or federal taxes period- this wouldn't be an issue.

If I were a Tribe member and received a dividend check eack month from casino profits I'd campaign and vote against I-892.

As someone who doesn't get a dividend check from Tribal casino profits each month, but pays increasingly higher property taxes I'm voting YES on I-892.

My Goodness!
I find myself agreeing with Rory, Grandpa and (dare I say) AuntyM.

According to the Public Disclosure Commission ...

A total of $5,930,695.37 has been donated towards defeating I-892.
The largest single contribution is $1,000,000.00 from the Tulalip Tribes.
Only $25,537.00, about 0.43% comes from other than the various Tribes.
$24,000.00 of that 0.43% comes from the Port Gamble Development Authority.


A total of $709,342.75 has been donated towards passing I-892.
The largest single contribution is $50,000.00 from Freddies Associates.
Only $25,000.00, about 3.52% comes from outside the USA by the Great American Gaming Corperation in Richmond BC.
The bulk of the contributions for I-892 are from local gambling establishments.


The proponents of I-892 are being out spent by more then 8 to 1. It is easy to see that the Tribal interests are spending heavily to preserve their monopoly on electronic gaming at the expense of any non-tribal competitors.

The Tribes are promoting racial priviledge and seeking to extinguish competition while the backers of the Initiative are seeking equal opportunity "in common with" the tribes.

Only through competition will the existing gaming operators be force to provide payoffs equitable with the standards set by the traditional gaming interests. The amount of winnings per dollar spent will be at least 75¢ in non-tribal establishments and the tribal interests will be forced to increase payouts to similar levels or risk losing market share.

Nearly 9¢ of every dollar spent at non-tribal establishment will go to a fund utilized for the reduction of Property Tax Levies. About 1¢ from every dollar of the 35% given to the state will be spent to treat problem gamblers.

- -- --- ---- --- -- -

For those interested, here is how it works...


A federal law, the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA), defines the forms of gaming (gambling) which may be conducted by federally recognized Indian tribes. For most types of gambling, a tribe may conduct an activity if the activity is permitted anywhere within the state in which the tribal land is located. Under federal law, states must negotiate concerning any form of gaming permitted within the state, and the tribes are not subject to state law restrictions on the time, place, or manner of play. The federal law encourages states and tribes to negotiate compacts (agreements) defining the extent of tribal gaming, and provides appeal procedures if the tribe and state cannot reach agreement. A number of tribes based in Washington have negotiated compacts permitting the tribes to conduct electronic versions of “scratch ticket lottery” games. Electronic scratch ticket machines can be built to visually resemble slot machines, but their internal operation is significantly different from true slot machines. Each Washington tribe operating electronic scratch ticket lottery machines has a compact with the state specifying the number of machines which may be operated and otherwise defining how, when, and where such activities may occur. Tribal gaming revenue must be used for tribal government operations, providing for the general welfare of the tribe, promoting economic development, donations to charity, or funding operations of local government agencies.

The state levies a property tax for the benefit of the common school system. The statutory rate is $3.60 per thousand dollars of assessed value upon the assessed valuation of all taxable property within the state. The Department of Revenue is responsible for adjusting this rate in each county to reflect a statewide equalization of property tax rates. Existing law limits increases in the state property tax levy to the lesser of 101% of the highest amount levied in the three previous years or the inflation rate for personal consumption expenditures as determined by the U.S. Department of Commerce.


The effect of the proposed measure, if it becomes law:

This measure would authorize non-tribal gambling establishments to operate electronic scratch ticket gambling machines of the same type as authorized in state-tribal gaming compacts. The term “non-tribal gambling establishments” would include any establishment licensed by the Gambling Commission to conduct a gambling activity, or any establishment licensed by the Horse Racing Commission. The total number of machines authorized for the non-tribal establishments would be equal to the total number of machines authorized for tribes in state-tribal compacts.

The measure would direct the Lottery Commission to operate an electronic scratch ticket lottery in which non-tribal gambling establishments could participate through the installation of electronic scratch ticket machines (player terminals) in the businesses where they are authorized to conduct other gambling activities. The largest 40 operations conducting bingo games and the largest house-banked card rooms would be authorized to use 125 player terminals per licensed location. Other establishments would be allocated smaller numbers of terminals as described in the measure. The Lottery Commission would regulate the conduct of the lottery, including the allocation of terminals to individual licensees.

The measure would require that the prizes to the holders of winning tickets or shares in the lottery be at least 75% of the gross annual revenue from electronic scratch ticket games. The remainder of the revenue would be defined as the “net win.” Of this net win, 65% would be retained by the individual licensee. The remainder would be placed in an electronic scratch ticket account. Thus, at least 75 cents of each dollar of electronic scratch ticket revenue would be paid out as winnings, 16 cents could be retained by the licensee, and the remainder (about 9 cents) would be placed in the electronic scratch ticket account.

Of the money placed in the account, the Lottery Commission would be authorized to use amounts reasonably necessary to administer the electronic scratch ticket games, the central computer used in the games, and related accounting and auditing functions. After deduction of administrative expenses, the money in the electronic scratch ticket account would be further allocated as follows. One percent (1%) would be dedicated exclusively for distribution to a contractor to pay for services associated with problem gambling. The remaining 99% would be transferred to a special account in the state treasury named the “equal treatment equals lower property taxes account.” Beginning with the state property tax levy for collection in the year 2007, the total state property tax levy would be reduced by the previous year’s gross deposits in this account.

Play of electronic scratch ticket games would be restricted to players 21 years old or more. Electronic scratch ticket licenses could not be issued to convenience stores or other locations readily accessible to minors. Sales would be limited to establishments licensed to conduct other gambling activities, and establishments losing their gambling licenses would also lose their licenses to participate in the electronic scratch ticket lottery. The Lottery Commission would be authorized to establish rules governing the conduct of the electronic scratch ticket lottery.

Where the *&$@ are they getting that 400 million dollar figure? That's extremely optimistic. So...even with Plunker's well researched argument, the majority of the revenue still goes to the gambling establishment. Didn't anyone remember what a crackpit Eyman is? He has little if no credibility and plenty of his own anti government agenda.. I am sick of too much government too... but you can definitely count on me for a NO vote. Oh yeah...so how is this initiative going to stop government from raising our property taxes whenever they feel like it? Oh, that's right...the endless millions from the gambling addicts in the bars....whatever. Screw it, I'm sticking to the fishing topics....

Plunker - I-892 attempts to address one aspect of the dichotomy between Tribal sovereignty and Tribal Super Citizenship???? WOW... sorry but I-892 is about gambling, not any of that other stuff that bothers you.

Aunty - If you want to talk about who had a monopoly, lets talk about another sovereign... the State of Washngton. THEY are the ones that had a monopoly and it was called the LOTTERY. And the State was sure as heck not going to let the Tribes cramp their style. Fortunately, however, the federal government saw that inequity and passed the act allowing indian gaming.

fuzzy - see above

stlhdfishn - Tribes get financing to start up just like any business does. There might even be some that get their financing from a gambling company... but most get their financing from other Tribes... seems that get better deals that way, imagine that. Most Tribal Casinos are owned by the Tribe outright after several years. What you DON'T see with Tribal Casinos is a Candian gambling company OWNING 51% of a Casino as is often the case with non-Indian casinos.

goinfishin - Thanks for the supporting remarks.

grandpa - funny... (I am not a member of an Indian Tribe) but you must be getting rusty because you asked me that question before a few months back... seems to be your standard question for people who do not share your views about tribes. You might want to think of a new line for future use. Of course if I were the type that liked to fire off snappy come-backs I could ask you what Ayrian Nation Chapter you belonged to, right?

Rory - Well, I don't have any answers for you... it all seems to be about saving you 30 bucks on your property taxes no matter what... eh?

Plunker - "The bulk of the contributions for I-892 are from local gambling establishments"... And these are largely owned, partnered, backed, controlled, etc. by the Canadian and Nevada gambling corporations... like I said before.... at least the Tribes are backing their interests with their own money.

I meant to call Eyman a "Crackpot" .....I reely kin tipe. When I'm not goinig too fast......

pacificnw,

I-892 is about more than gambling. It is about equal opportunity and it is about putting some needed revenue in our tax coffers. Your racist attitude is blinding your ability to accept the abandonment of exclusionary regulations in favor of a level playing field. I-892 does nothing to harm the Tribes nor does it an any way restrict their ability to operate gaming establishments.

What it does do is allow non-tribal interests to participate, but in a position of underdog where they can compete only through offering a better gambling experience in order to woo the customers from the established casinos.

What else it does is add 9¢ of every dollar wagered in a non-tribal facility towards lowereing the property tax rate. Only time will tell how much that adds to each year.

I don't really see the point in nitpicking about Canadian ownership because no matter who the corporate or family owner of a gambling establishment might be 9¢ of every dollar wagered will go to the "Tax Fund", 75¢ will go to payoffs and most of the remaining 16¢ profit will be spent locally on wages, rent and utilities.

In any case here is a list of the contributors:

17001, INC., SEATTLE
AAA BOWLS UNLIMITED INC, SEATTLE,
ANJO ENTERPRISES INC, KENT
ATOMIC BOWL, RICHLAND
BARKERVILLE INC., SUMAS
BAYOU BISTRO, INC., TUKWILA
BEVL, INC, LIBERTY LAKE
BIG NEVADA, INC., TUKWILA
BILL TOWNSEND BAIL BONDS, CLARKSTON
BILLIE'S CASINO, LLC, RENTON
BIRCH BAY HOLDINGS, LTD, BLAINE
BLUE ROCK INC., LONGVIEW
BOB'S TAVERN, SHELTON
CACTUS MOOM ENTERPRISES, INC., EVERETT,
CADILLAC RANCH CASINO & ENTERTAINMENT, LONGVIEW
CARRIAGE SQUARE SPORTS BAR & GRILL, KENT
CASCADE LANES, LOUNGE AND CASINO, RENTON
CASINO CARIBBEAN, YAKIMA
CEARLEY MIKE D., CHINOOK
CELEBRITIES CASINO, KENNEWICK
CHESTER TAVERN, SOUTH BEND
CHIEF JOSEPH TAVERN, BRIDGEPORT
CLUB BROADWAY, EVERETT
COYOTE BOB'S CASINO, INC., AUBURN
CRAZY MOOSE CASINO II, MOUNTLAKE TERRACE
DER LITTEN HAUS, CLARKSTON
DINNER BELL, LOON LAKE
DOC'S TAVERN INC., OCEAN PARK
DRIFT ON INN ROADHOUSE CASINO, SHORELINE
EASTMONT LANES, EAST WENATCHEE
EASTSIDE CLUB INC., OLYMPIA
EEC GRAND CENTRAL CASINO, TUKWILA
EPSTEIN NORIEGA LLC, SHORELINE
EVERETT GAMING, INC., TUKWILA
EVERGREEN ENTERTAINMENT CORP, TUKWILA
EVERGREEN MEDIA, SANTA ROSA, CA
FRATERNAL ORDER OF EAGLES FOE, KELSO
FREDDIES ASSOCIATES, AUBURN
GAMING CONSULTANTS INC., TUKWILA
GOLDEN NUGGET HOLDINGS, LLC TUKWILA
GOLDIES RESTAURANT, INC., CLE ELUM
GREAT AMERICAN GAMING CORP, RICHMOND, BC
GREEN LAKE GRILL, SEATTLE
GREENWOOD, OHLUND & CO. LLP, SEATTLE
HAWKS PRAIRIE CASINO LLC, LACEY,
HILGER DANIEL J., TACOMA
HILLTOP BOWL, INC., ILWACO
HIRST INC., OROVILLE
HITCHIN' POST SALOON, FEDERAL WAY
INTERSTATE MERCHANT, SEATTLE
IRON HORSE CASINO LLC, TACOMA
J&P ASSOCIATES, SPOKANE
J. D. W. INC. - MGMT. GROUP, EVERETT
J. MICHAEL'S PUB & EATERY, REDMOND
JANETTE WILKS-GROSS, ILWACO
JTJ ENTERPRISES, INC., VANCOUVER, WA
KEGLERS' INC., EAST WENATHEE
LAKE BOWL, INC., MOSES LAKE
LAKESIDE CASINO, LLC, FIFE
LOUNGE LIZARDS, LLC, TUKWILA
MAC'S CIGAR STORE, ABERDEEN
MAGIC LANES, SEATTLE
MALTESE BAR & GRILL, KELSO
MICHELS DEVELOPMENT, LLC, SEATAC
MONTESANO LODGE NO. 1210, MONTESANO
MORGAN'S LBT, INC., LONG BEACH
MOUNTLAKE GAMING, INC., TUKWILA
MUIR JAMES J., RENTON
MYERS, INC., CLARKSTON
NEW SIREN TAVERN, INC., SEATTLE
ORONDO BOWLING INC, EAST WENATCHEE
PAIR O' DICE INVESTMENTS, LLC, EVERETT
PARADISE, INC., TACOMA
PASTIME TAVERN, CASTLE ROCK
PINNACLE GAMING, LLC, FEDERAL WAY
PIONEER BAR & GRILL, MOSSYROCK
PLAYERS & SPECTATORS, SPOKANE VALLEY
POINT DEFIANCE CAFÉ & CASINO, LLC, RUSTON
PORKY'S CAFÉ & LOUNGE, LONGVIEW
PRE, INC., TACOMA
R. S. PRAIRIE, INC., BRUSH PRAIRIE
RASCALS, INC., SEATTLE
REEF INC., POINT ROBERTS
ROCCO GAMING INC., TUKWILA
ROMAN CASINO, SEATTLE
ROYAL CASINO, EVERETT
SCOREBORD PUBS, INC., FEDERAL WAY
SEA HAG BAR & GRILL, ILWACO
SEATTLE'S HISTORIC TRIANGLE PUB, SEATTLE
SENYOR ADVENTURE INC, SPOKANE
SHAG NASTY'S INC., DEER PARK
SHED INC, SPOKANE
SHORELINE GAMING INC., TUKWILA
SKI INN, INC., ENUMCLAW
SPECIAL K PUB & GRILL, SPOKANE
SPORTSMANS TAVERN, INC., MOSES LAKE
STAR TAVERN, CHEHALIS
STAR, INC., CARSON
STONE HUT BAR & GRILL, WALLA WALLA
SUNSET BOWLING & RECREATION INC., SEATTLE
SWINGING DOORS, SPOKANE
T.B.I. LAND INC, TUKWILA
TACOMA CASINO LLC, LAKEWOOD
TANASSE M. A, YAKIMA
THE CEDAR INN, OLYMPIA
TIMMRECK TIM, ONALASKA
TRACYTON PUBLIC HOUSE, TRACYTON
TUKWILA LAND COMPANY LLC, TUKWILA
TYEE LANES, EVERETT
UNCLE MO'S SNAPPY INN, RENTON
VI AND GLYNN'S PUB INC., MARYSVILLE
VIKING SERVICES INC., SEATTLE
VINCE'S ITALIAN RESTAURANT, SEATTLE
VORMSBERG CORPORATION, TUKWILA
WAGON WHEEL ENTERPRISES INC, BENTON CITY
WARTHAUG INC, SPOKANE
WIZARDS CASINO, BURIEN
WORKSHOP BAR & GRILL, REDMOND

if I-892 will save me even one red cent in this over taxed state I'll vote for it!

Plunker - Who is it that has the racist attitude when I am want to keep gambling to a minimum and I want to keep what gambling there is in AMERICAN hands (Indians are Americans, did you FORGET that??? - obviously) and you want to keep a huge chunk of it in the hands of foreign investors. If you looked into it you would likely discover that half the YES "contributors" you list are controled by the Canadians and the other half are connected to big Nevada Gambling Companies or an investment company owned by some past Enron executive (for example). You are simply carrying over your sportfishing attitude towards the tribes into another arena. It is not about leveling the so-called playing field as you claim... you wear your predjudices on your sleve.


Bobert - I'll send you a red cent.

Plunker - Who is it that has the racist attitude when I am want to keep gambling to a minimum and I want to keep what gambling there is in AMERICAN hands (Indians are Americans, did you FORGET that??? - obviously) and you want to keep a huge chunk of it in the hands of foreign investors. If you looked into it you would likely discover that half the YES "contributors" you list are controled by the Canadians and the other half are connected to big Nevada Gambling Companies or an investment company owned by some past Enron executive (for example). You are simply carrying over your sportfishing attitude towards the tribes into another arena. It is not about leveling the so-called playing field as you claim... you wear your predjudices on your sleve.


Bobert - I'll send you a red cent.

sorry PNW if your remarks reprised an old accusation but you really do sound very much on the side of the tribes on this one and that is fine. Being against the excesses afforded the tribes does not make me a KKK member. It makes me similar to a big majority of fishers who are sick of the growing super citizenship afforded the tribes. I-892 is not that desirable but is one way to start levelling the playing field. Take a trip to indian country (if you don't already live there) and check out what the huge windfall of cash has done for the average tribal member. Not much. Sure there is a boom in construction...check out the crews...maybe a couple of tribal members standing around in hard hats for window dressing because the contract requires it but for the most part the workers are non-indian. I suspect if the tribes were on the same playing field as everyone else they might just excel all by themselves. The BIF hand out system has been a dismal failure and that's a fact.

grandpa - That's OK... it was your accusation and we all know about your accusations.

I think it is important to speak up for tribes, Many of you folks on this site need a different point of view to "balance" the discussion. There is too much inbreeding of the same old tired retoric.

I hope you are not a member of the KKK. That would be disturbing.

Don't agree that I-892 levels anything. Sorry to ,again, disappoint you but I don't live in Indian country... well, unless you think the entire region is Indian Country and then we all line there, right?

What has the cash generated from Indian Casinos done? Quite a lot actually. But I guess we have to agree to disagree on that. I ahve tried to explain above but that does not seemed to have worked.

You could be right about the Tribes being left on their own and excelling. And I think most Tribes would like to be self sufficient and are working in that direction. Passing this initiative won't help their purpose, will it?

No hard feelings... I admit to wanting to stir the pot. Different perspectives are always good, right? Just trying to challenge those that think they have it all figured out. There is more to it than most of us think... I happen to know a little about the subject so I thought I would share. Its not about getting people to agree with me... its about getting them to think past the "lines" on occassion.

PNW......Accusations or not your points of view always have been leaning towards an apologist's role for the tribes. Mine usually take the tribes to task for wanton abuse of our resources in the name of treaty rights. That's ok but we just need to see which axe you are grinding. Your connection to the tribe is not obvious but it is there somewhere. That's fine but you should admit it so your opinions can be understood with the appropriate grain of salt.

I suspect !-892 is something of a weapon to knock the tribes down a notch rather than a real serious tax reduction measure. We cannot seem to negotiate "fair play" so maybe hardball is in order? We have an explosion of gambling in this state now so saying opposing I-892 will stop that expansion is somewhat of a fantasy. Without I-892 all the expansion will contunue to come from indian country.

foreign companies take money out of this state and ountry all the time.but they put money back into it with increased jobs and improvements to their investments.
I am for this initiative as I feel that everyone should have the same level playing field.
Equal opportunity for one and all............................Fishy.

Grandpa - Yes, your accusations are pretty well know... I have to give you that much.

You may think that I take an apologist's role for the tribes. Nothing could be further from the truth... but you probably knew that. My comments are meant to balance the seemingly uninformed and biased discussions about Tribes that normally occupy this site... pure and simple. Someone has to offer steerage corrections once in a while or the discussions on this board just keep turning right and right and right until they auger themselves into the dirt... as we have witnessed so many times.

Take the Tribes to task? Hardly. You are a complainer, thats all.

No axe to grind on my part... except offering all sides of a story, especially if not reflecting the popular opinion here. Again, I admit to a tendency to stir the pot.

There is a LOT of abuse going on with our fisheries resources. You like to point to Tribes as the sole source for those injustices. I know many, many cases where I can agree that Tribal fishers have abused the resource. But I see an absence of comments about non-Indian abuses from you... where is the balance? You seem like a relatively smart person. Perhaps you begin to see my point. The absolute lack of regard for the resource dispayed in a fishery like the Quilcene River "sport" fishery is a great example. Hence, my earlier comments.

The only grain of salt or anything else that my opinions need to be taken with are a grain of fairness... and to offer the "other side of the story" that is so often missing in so many topics brought up by you and others.

There are many that want to see the Tribes "hit" so they will grab this initiative and use it as a weapon... that is completely the wrong reason to vote YES for I-892.

Again, just one person's opinion and attempt to "level this playing field."

pacificnw,

You continue to play the "race card" but The truth of the matter is...

The Boldt decision affirmed the tribal right to fish "in common with".

The Indian Gaming Regulatory Act provides a tribal right to conduct gambling operations "in common with".

In accord with the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act a tribe may conduct an activity if the activity is permitted anywhere within the state in which the tribal land is located.

I-892 affirms that which the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act provides.

Chief Joseph of the Nez Perce said, "I only ask of the government to be treated as all other men are treated... We ask that the same law shall work alike on all men... with one sky above us and one country around us, and one government for all... that all people may be one people." and I agree.

I-892 provides for "equal rights" not "special rights".

That is why I and most concerned citizens will vote YES on the initiative.

I-892 will "level this playing field."

"Take the Tribes to task? Hardly. You are a complainer, thats all. "

I am a complainer and you are a fair and balanced, objective muse taking all sides into acccount? baloney

What we have here is, failure to communicate...

Unlike your statement... "fair and balanced, objective muse taking all sides into acccount"... what I actually SAID was that I wish to explore the other side of the range of opinions expressed on this site.... because I think these DISCUSSIONS need the balance. And I actually INTENDED on not being objective. I am simply trying to turn things around on you with the hopes that you might see some reasoning other than your own. I admit that I have failed, in your case and in the case of Plunker and probably others. No mas, no mas.

I admit that I am not always right. But I sure wish I had that "king of knowledge" and the feeling of certainty that I was right all the time like you. Must be nice.

I don't want to get into the tribal-rights or the gambling discussion. I just have one question. How is this not a tax? To be honest, I am a littlre ashamed to admit that I knew almost nothing about this initiative until I read this thread (unfortunately I still don't know very much about it). It never occured to me that it was supposed to be a tax-reduction measure. I'm sorry but that is kind of a joke.

This will not "reduce" taxes; it will only shift the tax burden from one group to another, from relatively well off property owners (a class that includes me) to poor saps who don't know well enough not to throw their money away gambling (most of whom, statistics show, tend to be less educated, less well off). Maybe that's fair enough, whatever, but please don't call this "revenue-neutral" tax relief (whatever the hell that means).

PS: I think someone needs to let Tim Eyeman know about the tax tyranny the people of Finland have to live with, so he can go there and help them for a little while.

PNW,
Do tell us how much you know about Tribal Casinos, their operation, and profit distributions.
Then take the information you have on the tribe and compare them to I-892 supporters.

I'll give you one example to start with and that is Federal and state taxes. Anything and everything the tribes purchase is non taxable.
Where can you purchase a Steak and Lobster dinner for $14.95?