William Bryan: “Mr. President, I think it is helpful to our colleagues if we put this amendment in some context. In 1988, the Congress…”

“Mr. President, I think it is helpful to our colleagues if we put this amendment in some context. In 1988, the Congress enacted the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act. That act says that to the extent that States permit gaming activities within the States, that Indian tribes within those States should have the same opportunity. Let me say that I am in support of that philosophy. In Nevada, we have a full range of casino gaming activity. There is no question in my State that tribes within Nevada have the same opportunity, and, indeed, we have five compacts that have been ratified between the Governor and the tribes in my State permitting those tribes to conduct the same kind of activity for gaming enterprises that we have in Nevada. Let me give a contrast, if I may. My friend from Hawaii and our colleagues from Utah--in those two States a determination has been made that no form of gaming activity should be permitted, something that I believe is a matter of public policy for those two States to make a determination. So it is equally clear under the act that Indian tribes would have no opportunity to participate in Indian gaming unless the States chose to permit it because they have made a public policy not to have any form of gaming.”