MGM takes case against third Connecticut casino to Congress
MMCT Venture, the Mashantucket Pequot-Mohegan partnership pursuing a third Connecticut casino, learned weeks ago that MGM Resorts International, developer of a $950 million resort casino in Springfield, Mass., was urging Congress to adopt legislation that would prohibit Indian tribes from operating commercial “gaming activity” on non-Indian lands.
The legislation was in the form of a proposed amendment to a Department of Defense spending bill.
In a June 1 letter to the chairman and vice chairman of the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs, the chairman of the National Indian Gaming Association took issue with MGM’s efforts.
Ernest Stevens Jr., the NIGA chairman, wrote that the association’s members “adamantly oppose this unprecedented attack on Indian tribes and their ability to pursue economic development opportunities.”
“There are numerous examples of tribes engaging in commercial economic development activities in a variety of industries, and there is absolutely no basis to single out tribes and prevent them from continuting to engage in economic development both on and off their reservation lands,” Stevens wrote.
“It would be unprecedented for Congress to limit these opportunities for tribal governments,” he added.
The chairman said MGM also was arguing that Indian tribes’ participation in commercial gaming outside their reservations “somehow conflicts” with the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act, which regulates Indian gaming on reservations.
“Clearly,” Stevens wrote, “commercial gaming is completely separate and distinct from IGRA …”
An MGM executive said in a statement Wednesday that Stevens’ letter “misrepresents MGM’s position.”
“MGM does not object to the established 'land in trust' process under the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act, which tribes have used to develop casinos off of their existing reservations,” said Alan Feldman, executive vice president for global government and industry affairs.
“Nor does MGM object to tribes participating in competitive processes to develop commercial casinos, like the one Mohegan and Mashantucket Pequot tribes competed in as part of the Massachusetts process,” he said.
The Mashantuckets and the Mohegans, respective owners of Foxwoods Resort Casino and Mohegan Sun, failed to obtain commercial gaming licenses they sought in the Bay State.
MGM has sought to thwart the tribes’ pursuit of a third Connecticut casino, chiefly through a federal lawsuit that claims the Connecticut law that authorized the tribes’ partnership is unconstitutional.
With financial backing from MGM, the Kent-based Schaghticoke Tribal Nation lodged a similar suit.
The state has asked that both suits be dismissed.
Andrew Doba, a spokesman for MMCT Venture, which is considering casino site proposals from three Hartford-area municipalities, responded in a statement to MGM’s lobbying for federal legislation.
"This is a company willing to spend huge sums of money to get what it wants,” he said. “Their actions in Connecticut — and now Washington — make it clear that they are willing to do anything to stop this project."
"And if they're successful," he said, "there will be more people in Connecticut standing in the unemployment line."
Comment threads are monitored for 48 hours after publication and then closed.
