Rep. Joe Baca, Well Paid by Tribal Gaming Opposes Internet Gaming

Imagine that, say it ain't so Joe! All it takes is some Indian Gaming money and Joe Baca doesn't want Californians to have a chance to make money and create other jobs. A plan to legalize online gambling moved forward this week in the U.S. House of Representatives, raising concerns from an Inland lawmaker and area tribes, who say the legislation would cut into California's casino business and imperil thousands of jobs around the state.

The legislation, which would allow gamers to make certain kinds of bets legally over the Internet, was approved Wednesday by the Financial Services Committee, clearing the way for a vote on the House floor.

Look, many people do not want to travel to a casino to gamble. They can do so from the comfort of their own home. Why go to a place, like tribal casinos, which doesn't have to report their income, we get little in taxes? Many tribes, like Pechanga, have violated civil rights of their people, why should we reward THEM? Others, like San Manuel, do many good things.

It's time to level the playing field, either get internet gaming or start opening casino gaming to businesses that are fully regulated by the state of California. And as for Joe Baca: In the current election cycle, Baca has received at least $36,050 in campaign cash from various tribes

Pechanga and Chukchansi, Civil Rights Violating Tribes Raise Money

Two large gaming tribes (well, financially large, they are much smaller since eliminating 25% and 50% of their tribes) will throw their weight around in California politics. Remember how Pechanga tried to keep Californians from voting?

An independent-expenditure group backed by California Native American tribes filed a letter with the Federal Election Commission this week announcing its intent to raise and spend unlimited amounts of money supporting candidates in California congressional races.

The group, known as Californians for Fiscally Responsible Leadership, was apparently the first committee in the country to announce its intent to take advantage of FEC rulings last week that effectively lifted fundraising restrictions on soft-money political committees that declare themselves independent from candidates or political parties, if only ostensibly.

The committee has reported raising a little more than $50,000 since early June – about $25,000 each from the Pechanga Band of Luiseno Indians and Chukchansi Development Authority, both of which represent prominent California-gambling interests.

California Watch has the full story

Pechanga Liar in Chief, Mark Macarro Testifies before Senate on S.2956

Pechanga Band of Luiseno Indians Chairman Mark Macarro testified before the Senate today on S 2956, a water rights bill.



For those who did not get a chance to watch or listen to today's hearing on S. 2956, here is a brief update as to 2 of the key requests made by the Committtee to the Tribe:

1. Be prepared to answer written questions regarding the proposed settlement and submit answers to the Committee.


OP: Here are some questions!



WHY Did you lie to Congress when testifying on the Great Oak Property?

HOW many times have you lied to Congress?

WHY did you try to keep the citizens from California from voting on Prop. 94?

WHY do you need more water if you have FEWER citizens?

WHY should you be trusted with funds for Alottees that you have removed from the tribe?

HOW did the recognition for Temecula Indians get changed to Pechanga Indians?

WHY DO you think it's okay to violate the civil and human rights of your citizens?

DID you help eliminate historical, blood tribal members to benefit a crime family?

Why would the word of a child molestor mean more to you than your most vaunted Elder?

SINCE you cheated your own tribal members, won't you cheat the alottees too?




2. Contact the Governor (of California), as well as other agencies, and ask them to weigh in on the proposed settlement and its provisions.
3. Keep the Committee updated on negotiations with the Administration.

Along with the proposed water rights, the settlement will provide around $50 million for projects and money pay out to the Tribe.

The Committee has delayed taking any action S. 2956, so this provides an opportunity to develop our own questions about the settlement and to contact the Governor's office with concerns about the terms of the settlement.

Opposition Letter to S 2956 Which Gives Power of Water Rights for Reservation Alottees that Pechanga has Terminated From The Tribe.

How fair do you think Pechanga will be with $29 MILLION dollars?

Please send a letter and fax to the addresses in the letter.

Opposition Letter to S 2956

California Senator's Boxer AND Feinstein Sponsor Bill to FURTHER Strip Individual Indians of their Rights

Senators Boxer and Feinstein support a water rights settlement for the Pechanga Band that would give the tribe the authority to negotiate the terms of the settlement on behalf of allotees, some of whom the tribe has denied membership to or disenrolled. The tribe would also be allowed to determine how allotees received their share of the settlement.

Taking into consideration the tribe's actions to deny or strip numerous allotees of their fair share of proceeds from tribal economic development, why are law makers allowing the tribe to negotiate and determine the share of the settlement on behalf of people that tribal officials have previously damaged?

Senators, PLEASE withdraw your sponsorship of this bill.


Follow us on Twitter @opechanga

Win A Jackpot at Casino Pauma, Get Banned For Life As Undesirable

KNOW BEFORE YOU GO. You lose MANY of your rights when you visit a Tribal Casino.

Laura (left) and Jill Waters, sisters-in-law, both in their late 50s, have been barred for life from the Pauma Casino. They are considered undesirables and were accused of money laundering.

All sisters-in-law Jill and Laura Waters of San Marcos wanted to do that night in late May was earn enough credits on their Casino Pauma rewards cards to get two free sets of china.

By the end of the evening, they were banished from the casino for life, accused of being money launderers and denied the $2,000 jackpot they had won.

Here’s what happened, according to the women:

It was getting late, and the women had earned enough points playing slots to receive the dishes. They were thinking about leaving until an announcement came over the loudspeakers at midnight about $1 hot dogs. Laura Waters went to get some franks for the two of them. Her card was in a Super 8 Race slot machine, and Jill Waters took her sister-in-law’s place in front of it.

The women said they visit various Indian casinos, share their cards and split their winnings.

On this night, one yellow car, two cars, then eight cars popped up on the slot machine’s screen. It seemed to take forever for the last wheel to stop spinning: another car. Jackpot. $2,000.

“I’d never seen anyone get all nine symbols,” Jill Waters said.

Laura Waters, 62, had returned by then with the hot dogs. Because it was her card in the machine, she took over the spot that Jill had occupied temporarily.

Eventually, a casino worker came over. Laura Waters gave the employee her driver’s license because jackpots surpassing $1,199 must be declared for tax reasons. Fifteen minutes went by before a security agent approached the women and asked who pushed the winning jackpot button, the sisters-in-law remembered.

Jill Waters, 57, said it was she and explained why they later switched seats.

The security agent began shaking his head and repeating the words “malicious intent” and later “seat switching,” the women recalled.

One thing led to another, and finally the women were led to a hallway in the back part of the casino. They were followed by several security guards.

“They remained behind us like a barrier,” Jill Waters said. “I guess they thought two old ladies were going to bolt and make a run for it.”

Then, the women said, they were taken into a locked room.

“The next thing I see was a bench with built-in handcuffs,” Jill Waters said. “This was not a commissioner’s office. It was an interrogation room.”

A guard was posted at the door while another man began filling out paperwork, asking Jill Waters questions such as whether she had any scars or tattoos and what her maiden name was.

“We were uncomfortable but still trying to laugh about it. We were waiting for someone to come in with common sense and explain what was going on,” Jill Waters said. “But no one ever did.”

Their photographs were taken and copies of their driver’s licenses were made, the sisters-in-law recounted.

Hours had gone by when the women had some papers put in front of them. It was explained that by signing the papers, they were acknowledging that they were banned from the casino and could be arrested if they ever tried to re-enter.

FOLLOW US on Twitter @opechanga

George Lopez, Outspoken on AZ Immigration Law, In Bed With Civil Rights Violators by Performing at Pechanga

Say it isn't so, G-Lo. We reported that you stood with CUBAN civil rights protestors. You commented on the AZ immigration law that could possibly violate civil rights. But when it comes to ACTUAL civil rights violators HERE in CALIFORNIA.... you help support THEM?

Please CANCEL your performances scheduled for September 16 and 17 at Pechanga because of THEIR civil rights violations.

George, here is a portion of the letters written to Attorney General Holder on the civil rights violations by tribes in CA:


Throughout California Indian Country, tribal officials have taken actions which have denied and/or stripped thousands of California Indians of their membership status and denied them access to federal benefits and programs in the areas of housing, education, health, voting and public works assistance. In some instances, the illegal actions occurred decades ago, however, there has been a marked increase since Indian Gaming was approved and later expanded in California.


Tribal leaders justify their right to systematically deny civil rights and expel their citizens under the guise of tribal sovereignty. Tribal leaders have routinely committed acts to deny Indian individuals due process; equal protection of tribal, state, and federal laws; property interest rights; and voting rights. Theses actions have been carried out in gross violation of laws enacted to guarantee and protect the rights of the individual Indian.


We can no longer allow those who oppose upholding the civil and voting rights of thousands of California Indians to claim that this is a sovereignty issue that rests solely within the domain of tribal courts and tribal law. Few California Tribes actually have tribal courts. Therefore, in most cases, the tribal government officials responsible for the violations of law are the very same people who pass judgment as to whether or not laws have been violated - they are the judge and jury all rolled into one.

Picayune Rancheria, Civil Rights Violator, to Expand their Operations

Californians, if you REALLY care about violations of civil rights, then you want to drive RIGHT BY any business that supports known civil rights violations. Chukchansi is one, Pechanga another and Redding Rancheria still another

Everyday hundreds of travelers pass the Chukchansi Resort and Casino on their way to and from Yosemite National Park. Some stop to gamble and grab a bite ... but soon ... travelers will be able to buy gas, smokes, and a sandwich.

Case Lawrence said, "Chukchansi crossing is unlike anything in the Valley. It's going to be a Native American fuel outlet. It's going to see gas at a scale and volume that's really unheard of here in the Valley."

Lawrence is the CEO of Mighty Oak Capital ... the manager of the Chukchansi Tribe's funds. He says the tribe is trying to diversify their economy. Because it doesn't have to pay state or local taxes it can sell gas 30 cents cheaper than any other gas station in the Valley.

There's no question cheap gas is good for consumers and the creation of jobs will be good for the local economy. But there's a lot of mom and pop businesses up the road who are very concerned about their future.

Chet Shah is just a stone's throw from the new development. He's the first gas station travelers see after the casino.

"That is going to hurt all over the 41 from Coarsegold to Oakhurst ... and people is going to go there first because their price is going to be cheap. There's no restrictions for them and they can do anything they want to," said Shah.

Alan Lohuis owns the Coarsegold Market. He's watched the casino go up. He's seen the housing market boom and then crash. He's weathered it all ... but this new development might be more than his small market can handle.

Alan Lohuis said, "As the economy is really hard right now. It's going to make things even tougher. That's basically the bottom line. It's just gonna be one more to compete for the smaller pie."

Indian tribes receive legal benefits like tax exemptions from the federal government so they can have a leg up in competing with local businesses. What remains to be seen is whether that advantage will end up hurting the local economy.

The Moral Question on Pechanga Terminations: WHAT WOULD YOU DO?

WHAT WOULD YOU DO?

Pechanga (meaning the tribal council and disenrollment committee) has CHEATED its members, by disenrolling them from the tribe. They have wronged over 500 people, when you include spouses and children who cannot claim membership from their ancestors who started the reservation.

Since 1995, almost 15 years, they have been paying per capita to each member of Pechanga. Here is the breakdown as they give for loan authorizations for the first years:
1995: $1,075 1996: $3,360 1997: $20,204 1998: $39,853

Now, bear in mind that by 1998, this is MORE money than many of the tribe has made in a year, EVER. You'd think that people would be HAPPY to be making an extra $3,000 a month.
1999: $44,071 2000: $47,744 2001: 63,800 2002: $91,000

Well now, in 8 short years, tribal members are making $7,500 per month, got health care approved and guess what? CPP started getting JEALOUS of what San Manuel was making (significantly more, due to smaller membership) so they started looking at how they could get more money.

Was setting a positive example of tribal unity and good public relations to build business and relationships the way?

or

Was getting rid of some members so you could control power and get their per capita the way?

Which would you choose? WHAT WOULD YOU DO?

Would the Pechanga Band of Luiseno Indians Be Better Served By Term Limits?

The Pechanga Band of Luiseno Indians is currently led by the dishonorable Mark Macarro, who in his ten years as tribal chairman, has led the tribe to violate the civil and human rights of 25% of the citizens. Is that good for the tribe?

Sure the tribe has done well since the casino opened, but has Macarro done even better? He made over $360,000 a year by eliminating HUNDREDS of tribal citizens. His brother is ensconced as tribal attorney. His WIFE, Holly Cook Macarro, has opened her own consulting/lobbying firm and took the Pechanga Business from Holland and Knight when she left, now Pechanga has been paying her firm $240,000 a year. Macarro also gets a hefty salary as Tribal Chair.

Time for term limits?

Oklahoma Court Sends Cherokee Freedmen Case to Washington DC.

NORTHERN DISTRICT FEDERAL COURT OF OKLAHOMA SENDS CHEROKEE FREEDMEN CASE (Cherokee Nation Vs Nash et al) TO WASHINGTON DC TO SAME COURT AS CHEROKEE FREEDMEN FEDERAL CASE (Vann et al v Salazar) BEING TRIED SINCE 2003 On July 2, 2010, the Honorable Oklahoma Northern District Court Judge Terrance Kern issued an order transferring the case Cherokee Nation Vs Nash et al (09-CV-52-TCK-PJC), filed in February 2009 by the Cherokee nation of Oklahoma to Washington DC. The Oklahoma filed action will be tried along with the Cherokee freedmen case Vann et al Versus Salazar(1:03CV-1711-HHK) filed in August 2003 in the Washington DC District court of Honorable Judge Henry Kennedy. Issues in both cases deal with the rights of Cherokee Freedmen tribal members (descendants of free mixed African Indians and blacks enslaved with the protection of Cherokee nation government policies prior to the end of the Civil War) based on the 1866 treaty between the US government and the Cherokee nation which guaranteed citizenship to persons of African descent living in the Cherokee nation at the beginning of the Civil War. In the Washington DC case, defendants are the Department of Interior and Cherokee Chief Chad Smith while in the Oklahoma case, defendants are 5 individual plaintiffs who are registered as Cherokee freedmen tribal members as well as the US Department of Interior. In the Oklahoma case, both legal counsels for the US Department of Interior as well as the Cherokee freedmen tribal members had filed motions requesting that the Oklahoma case be transferred to the Washington DC Federal court. OP: Chad Smith said "slaves were treated well" Marilyn Vann, President of the Descendants of Freedmen of the Five Civilized Tribes Association and Band Chief of the Freedmen Band of Cherokee Nation states: “We are extremely happy with the decision of the Northern District Court that permits the 5 freedmen which were sued by their own nation the ability to fight for justice in DC where the Freedmen Band which has been prosecuting the same issues in the Washington DC court since they were denied the right to vote and run for office in 2003. We eagerly await the day when all descendants of Dawes enrolled Cherokee freedmen can register/reregister as Cherokee nation tribal members, vote and run for tribal political office as promised our ancestors by the US government and tribal officials in 1866. Just as the US government owed protection of citizenship rights to descendants of blacks in Mississippi who had been enslaved by US government policies, so does the Cherokee nation owe protection of citizenship rights to descendants of black persons whose ancestors were forced to endure chattel slavery under the blessing and protection of Cherokee nation government policies. Jon Velie, lead Counsel for the Cherokee Freedmen in both the Oklahoma and Washington DC filed cases states that: “The Northern District decision to transfer the case brought by the Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma against 5 individual freedmen turned on the fact that that the case had essentially the same issues as the case brought by the Cherokee Freedmen Band and several individual freedmen in Washington DC which was the first filed case. Another matter of interest was the court’s finding that the tribe had waived sovereign immunity by filing the case especially while the DC court action was still pending. The DC court of Appeals has previously held in 2008 that the 13th amendment and the treaty of 1866 have whittled away the tribe’s right to discriminate against the freedmen”.

Pechanga Tribes Termination Committee IGNORES EXCULPATORY Evidence in Paulina Hunter Disenrollment

Exculpatory evidence is evidence favorable to a defendant in a criminal trial that exonerates or criminal case, we can NOW be criminally charged for trespass on our own reservation. PECHANGA IGNORED this evidence and took hearsay evidence of a child molestor.

Here's the letter Dr. John Johnson, of Santa Barbara's Natural History Museum sent to the Pechanga Enrollment Committee.They are a termination committee, as they have terminated more Native Americans, than they've enrolled in the past ten years.

SANTA BARBARA MUSEUM OF
NATURAL HISTORY
2559 Puesta del Sol Rd. Santa Barbara, CA 93105

June 20, 2006

Pechanga Tribal Council
Pechanga Indian Reservation
Temecula Band of Luiseño Mission Indians
P. O. Box 1477
Temecula, CA 92953

Dear Council Members:

I am writing to respond to the Record of Decision issued March 16, 2006 by the Pechanga Enrollment Committee regarding disenrollment of the lineal  descendants of Paulina Hunter. I was surprised and dismayed when I read the “Conclusions” section on pages 25-26 of that decision, because I felt that many of the conclusions were either based on misinterpretations of the documentary evidence or unjustified by what had been presented earlier in the text of the Record of Decision.

In the summer and fall of 2004, I prepared a report on “The Ancestry of Paulina Hunter” at the request of the Pechanga Enrollment Committee. Although the Committee references this report in its list of documents that it reviewed (Doc. 14 on p. 4), my findings were completely overlooked in the Record of Decision.

In the report that I prepared at the Enrollment Committee’s behest, I reviewed the genealogical clues to Paulina Hunter’s background. The preponderance of the evidence indicates that Paulina Hunter’s father was Mateo Quasacac, who was the only Indian listed as having been born at “Pichanga” in the surviving early records of Mission San Luis Rey. Mateo Quasacac was also the father of Michaela Quilig (“Michella Quilich”), a life-long resident of Temecula and Pechanga. Michaela Quilig was an original Pechanga allottee like Paulina Hunter. Paulina Hunter would stay with Michaela Quilig when she would visit Pechanga, an indication of the closeness of their relationship. This is to be expected for two women who were half-sisters.

My report presented significant evidence that Paulina Hunter’s maternal grandmother, Restituta, was born at the original village of Temecula. Thus, Paulina Hunter descended from an original Temecula family. This information directly contradicts the statement
asserted in Conclusion 4 of the Record of Decision that “Paulina Hunter is not of Temecula Descent.”

Conclusion 5, which states, “Paulina Hunter was not an original Pechanga Temecula person,” is incorrect. I have already pointed out that my report presented evidence that Paulina’s father was the only Indian listed in the early San Luis Rey mission records who was actually born at Pechanga. Furthermore, the reasoning presented in Conclusion 5 is entirely based upon a misinterpretation of the evidence. John Miller, Paulina Hunter’s grandson, stated on his enrollment application (authorized by the 1928 California Indian
Jurisdictional Act) that his “Grandmother and Great Grandparents were San Luis Rey Mission Indians.” The Record of Decision incorrectly concludes that “the correct tribal ancestry of Paulina Hunter was San Luis Rey” and therefore not Pechanga Temecula.

In fact, the label “San Luis Rey Mission Indians” was an equivalent term to the way “Luiseños” is used today. All Pechanga Temecula Indians were “San Luis Rey Mission Indians,” because all tribe members today all have ancestors who were baptized at Mission San Luis Rey. As some on the Pechanga council well know, I have responded frequently to requests by current tribal members to reconstruct their family genealogies using the mission records. Thus, I am in a position to know that virtually everyone in the tribe today descends from “San Luis Rey Mission Indians.” John Miller’s statement on his enrollment application doesn’t make him any different that anyone else who was a Pechanga Temecula tribe member at that time.
Indeed, there are many enrollment applications for people who are ancestors of today’s Pechanga tribe members that make virtually identical statements to that made by John Miller.

It is unfair to the descendants of Paulina Hunter to be disenrolled from the Temecula Band of Luiseño Mission Indians based upon these incorrect conclusions contained in the Record of Decision of March 16, 2006. There is no credible evidence that Paulina Hunter was not a member of the Pechanga Temecula tribe; in fact the preponderance of the
genealogical evidence contained in surviving records would indicate that she was a descendant of both Pechanga and Temecula ancestors.

Sincerely,
John R. Johnson, Ph.D.
Anthropology Department Head
Advancing Appreciation and Understanding of Natural Science Founded 1916

Rep. Boren of OK to Meet With Pechanga Disenrolled Seeking his Help

The word from an Oklahoma contingent of Pechanga Tribal Members who were terminated from the tribe, is that they will meet with Rep. Dan Boren on Saturday, July 3.

They will be discussing the injustice against terminated Native Americans and those in the moratorium. There are Hunter family who have been in the moratorium since day one.

Hunter family members will be seeking his assistance in gaining a hearing on the enformcement of the Indian Civil Rights Act of 1967. The hearing has been requested by Rep. Mike Thompsen of CA to Rep. Nick Rahall who is committee chairman.

The Pechanga Band of Luiseno Indians, currently headed by the less than honorable Mark Macarro have elections upcoming.

Civil Rights Violating Pechanga Band will Host Pow Wow, Will Hide What they Have Done to Indian People

Pechanga's 15th Annual Pow Wow will be this weekend. They sure won't be discussing the fact that the Pechanga Band of Luiseno Mission Indians has harmed more Indians than the "White Man" has in the Temecula area.

This tribe is well know for violating the civil rights and basic human rights of their people. Keep your children close, if you attend and support what Pechanga has done. They have at least one child molestor walking around.

It's a good opportunity to NOT spend money at the casino, not support ANY booth that is run by a Pechanga member and to ASK anyone you talk to if they have read this blog.

Simply tell them to read originalpechanga.com