Casinos deal clout, controversy to lobbyists.

Byline: David Steves The Register-Guard

EMERGING PLAYERS FOUR-PART SERIES (SIDE STORY)

It's casino money that pays their way in Salem and Washington, D.C.

And it's casino money that they're out to protect.

But when they're doing their jobs well, the lobbyists who represent most of Oregon's nine tribes aren't talking about casinos - they're keeping legislators and congressmen focused on other issues, ranging from health care and housing appropriations to salmon projects and greater recognition of tribal governmental rights.

"The tribes have got the lobbyists there for defense. Now, as long as they're there, as long as they're participating, it's a question of, `What else can they help with?' ' said Bill Perry, who lobbies for the Oregon Restaurant Association, which, like the tribes, closely follows gambling-related legislation.

Tribal lobbyists in the state and U.S. capitals say the rise of Indian casinos has brought both clout and controversy to their jobs.

Ginny Boylen, a Washington, D.C., lobbyist, said the casinos - and the casino-derived candidate contributions - have been a mixed bag for the tribes. "I think the casinos and the fact that the tribes have money has caused more attention to be paid to tribes, and more animosity to develop," said Boylen, a lobbyist for several tribes, including Oregon's Cow Creek Band of Umpqua Indians.

Yes, the tribes and their campaign contributions are grabbing Congress' attention on traditional issues, such as health, welfare, education and federally funded on-reservation infrastructure needs. But in Washington, D.C., at least, she said the tribes' lobbyists spend much of their time fending off bills that would cut into the profits and expansion of tribal casinos.

One such bill, which the tribes and their lobbyists worked to defeat, would have slapped a 34 percent federal tax on historically tax-exempt tribes' casinos and other business ventures. Tribes are particularly on the defensive with a bill being pushed by Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., which would restrict new casinos built off reservations.

Six of Oregon's nine tribes currently employ Washington, D.C., lobbying firms. It's a practice that dates back for decades, given the important role Congress and the federal government played in tribes' affairs since long before the 1988 federal law governing Indian casinos. Congress oversees the Bureau of Indian Affairs and appropriates money to tribes for health, education and other programs.

In Salem, the tribes didn't hire lobbyists until the 1990s, after their casinos were established - and they worried that legislators or governors wouldn't support their existence.

In 1997, the Grand Ronde became the first tribe to spend money on lobbyists in Oregon's Capitol. By the 2005 legislative session, six of the state's nine tribes employed a total of 13 lobbyists, according to lobbying disclosure forms filed with the state.

Grand Ronde lobbyist and tribal member Justin Martin said tribes' presence at the state Capitol has brought about a gradual reduction in the number of bills they viewed as anti-tribal casino.

In 1997, the Grand Ronde considered 20 of the 39 gaming-related bills in the Legislature to be damaging to the tribe's interests. One would have allowed for competition against Indian casino gaming by legalizing off-site wagering on horse and greyhound racing. Another would have required tribes to contribute a portion of their casino profits to the state and local governments. None of the anti-tribal gaming bills passed that session.

By the 2005 session, the tribe's lobbyists identified only two of that session's gaming-related bills as damaging. Neither bill passed.

Martin attributed the trend to tribal lobbyists' track record of defeating anti-casino legislation, as well as their success in building positive relationships with lawmakers that ensure such bills don't even get introduced.

"It's just a matter of educating your elected officials," he said.

With the Legislature's disinclination for taking on the tribes' gaming operations, their lobbyists have been able to make gains on other issues.

Recent legislatures have passed laws that added tribal representation to natural resources and public health commissions, established teaching licenses for American Indian language instructors, and given tribal libraries the same standing and public-funding eligibility as other public libraries.

Other recent laws have allowed the tribes to address long-standing grievances. One lets Indian tribes go to court to force the return of ill-gotten archaeological objects. Another bans the use of the term "squaw" - an offensive slur to American Indians - for public place names. As a result, such places as the formerly named Squaw Creek State Natural Site - a forest fronting the ocean south of Yachats, has been renamed with the Chinook jargon for "Beautiful Woman." It's now called Tokatee Klootchman Natural Site.

In earlier years, the tribes would have needed to build coalitions with like-minded social-interest groups to press their case for such changes, said Grand Ronde tribal member David Lewis, a Ph.D. candidate at the University of Oregon.

"Since the casinos have brought a lot of money into the picture," he said, "the tribes are able to do a lot of that on their own."

See main story, "Success of casinos ups ante on tribes' power in politics," page A1.