Considering all of Howard Dean’s policy flip-flops — and, unfortunately, there have been so many — his switch on American Indian casinos may seem like a relatively inconsequential matter.
I would argue, however, that it’s likely to have an impact in at least one key primary — New Mexico.
In November, Dean addressed the National Congress of American Indians meeting in Albuquerque, touting his enthusiastic support for casino gaming for federally recognized tribes. The remarks were very well received; casinos have become a critical source of revenue for many tribal communities nationwide and the audience was relieved to hear Dean’s remarks.
Back in Vermont, however, American Indian leaders and advocates were wondering what in the world Dean was talking about.
“He’s talking out of both sides of his mouth,” April St. Francis, chief of the Abenaki tribal organization in Vermont, told the Burlington Free Press (link no longer available). “I’m outraged.”
As governor, Dean refused to extend state recognition to the tribe because, according to St. Francis, Dean didn’t want the Abenaki to open a casino on their lands in northwest Vermont.
Jeff Benay, chairman of the Governor’s Advisory Commission on Native American Affairs in Vermont under Dean, also told the Free Press that Dean’s comments to the NCAI did not reflect the way Dean acted on the issue while in office.
“This is not the policy Howard Dean had when he was governor of Vermont,” Benay said, referring to the gaming issue.
Complicating matters, the Washington Post’s Al Kamen noted today that Dean backed a GOP effort in 1997 to strictly impose state and local taxes on tribes’ businesses, including casinos.
In fact, in June 1997 Dean wrote to the bill’s lead sponsor, Rep. Ernest Istook (R-Okla.), to endorse the Republican’s proposal.
“Although Vermont does not have any Indian land, we lose tax revenues from sales made from Indian lands near our borders,” Dean told Istook. “It would be extremely unfortunate if the problem were allowed to grow. I will be pleased to lend my support to this bill.”
At the time, the National Congress of American Indians — the very same group Dean spoke to about his support for Indian casinos last month — successfully fought against the Istook bill, calling the proposal “unjust and unnecessary.”
Funny, Dean didn’t mention his disagreement with the group when he was asking for its support in November.
I wonder what NCAI members and leaders will think when they hear about Dean’s letter to Istook? And what kind of impact might this have in the New Mexico primary, with its large American Indian population?