The Global Gaming Expo might be a grand stage, but members of the National Indian Gaming Commission (NIGC) will be on an even larger one this Wednesday. NIGC members are among those requested for appearance that day by members of the U.S. Senate Committee on Indian Affairs.
The topic is pretty broad, but so are future paths of gaming. So give them a break. Wednesday’s hearing is titled: “Doubling Down on Indian Gaming: Examining New Issues and Opportunities for Success in the Next 30 Years.”
NIGC Chairman Jonodev Chaudhuri semi-joked that he was using Tuesday morning’s G2E session, designed to update conference attendees on federal regulations, as a dry run for Wednesday’s big show.
Wherever he is, Chaudhuri is consistent in stating the mission of the NIGC, which was created shortly after the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA) took effect in 1989.
“IGRA maintains tribes are the primary beneficiaries and regulators of their operations,” Chaudhuri said, adding that the first paragraph of the act points out the “long standing principal federal policy of supporting tribal self-sufficiency.
“That’s been an important guiding benchmark in what we do. But those benchmarks are important as we look to the future.”
He speaks often about the NIGC’s role of preventing what he calls “gamesmanship” – such as tribes spending their gaming revenues to overpay for a product that benefits a friend or acquaintance — and the NIGC has taken a larger role in training member tribes about ways to avoid breaking the rules before a situation arises.
“In terms of resources, you can do what you can to assist your tribal regulatory partners to address each and every issue that comes down the pike,” he said. “But more important than that is sending a message that deters illicit behavior.
“If we look at enforcement as a support of IGRA’s requirement we can be aggressive regulators, but we can do that in way that is pro-tribal.”
A session attendee asked Chaudhuri at the end of the session how he will respond if U.S. Senators ask him if any part of IGRA should be changed, and he answered in generalities.
“We would caution any policy changes to keep in mind the successes of Indian gaming,” he said. “If you’re talking legislative or regulatory tweaks… if they impact gaming, you have to recognize that IGRA has helped tribes grow the industry.
“But beyond that there’s some concerning narratives that are out there. This is really a time for unity. Because some of these narratives, if taken in the wrong direction, could impact future income.”
That could be interpreted as a cautionary code for those exploring Internet gaming, sports betting, and/or what is termed as ‘off-reservation gaming.’
In his pre-submitted statement to the committee on Wednesday, Chaudhuri notes that the NIGC in 2016 conducted 599 site visits, 474 audit statement reviews, 226,857 FBI fingerprint and name checks, 185 surveillance reviews, 314 tribal licensing issuance reviews, six internal control assessments, two internal audit reviews, 18 IT vulnerability assessments, and presented 33 training events to 1,662 participants.
Other panelists at the Wednesday hearing are: John Tahsuda III, principal deputy assistant secretary of the U.S. Department of the Interior’s Indian Affairs, Keeny Escalanti, president of the Fort Yuma Quechan Indian Tribe in Yuma, Arizona; Harold “Gus” Frank, chairman of the Forest County Potawatomi, in Crandon, Wisconsin; Leonard Forsman, chairman of the Suquamish Tribe, Suquamish, Washington; and Ernie Stevens, president of the National Indian Gaming Association.
