WLNS: Gov. Snyder/AG Schuette Opposes Lansing Casino Proposal

Here.

And here’s the letter:

Eitrem 0207121

An excerpt:

Governor Rick Snyder and Attorney General Bill Schuette put their opposition of the proposed Lansing casino in writing Monday. Their letter was addressed to the chairman of the Sault Saint Marie tribe of Chippewa Indians.

For the casino to even become a reality in the first place it needs to be approved by the federal government. The tribe has to ask the U.S. Department of Interior to take the land into trust and make it tribal land, then it would be eligible for gaming.

One issue facing the proposal to build a casino in Lansing is the fact that there are already 3 off-reservation casinos in the state.

The final decision would come from the federal government, but one expert says the opposition from state leaders could make this all a bit more difficult.

“The governor role I think can potentially be huge in that politics is everything when it comes to off reservation gaming,” said Matthew Fletcher, director of the Indigenous Law and Policy Center at MSU.

The letter made public from the governor and attorney general to the Sault St. Marie Chippewa Indian tribe has Fletcher a bit surprised.

“That’s pretty tough…tough talk,” said Fletcher.

In the letter it flatly says they oppose the opening of the casino.

“If this was a different world and the Governor supported this, it would put pressure on the Department of Interior to act quicker. It would make the other tribes back down,” said Fletcher.

Fletcher says the Department of Interior will listen closely to what the governor has to say and his opposition could cause a great delay in moving forward.

“This is a chunk of land that is right in the heart of the state’s capital and certainly the state is going to have say in what happens when that land completely leaves the state’s jurisdiction,” said Fletcher.

2 thoughts on “WLNS: Gov. Snyder/AG Schuette Opposes Lansing Casino Proposal

  1. Thomas February 18, 2012 / 8:40 am

    Mr. Fletcher, I noticed that in the above aforementioned letter you state “when”, and not if, the land leaves the states jurisdiction. Can I assume that you are expecting that the land will be designated as Land held in trust? Or am I merely taking the “when” out of context?

Comments are closed.