```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5079 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

114th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5079

     To amend the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act to require that, in 
 California, certain off-reservation gaming proposals shall be subject 
    to the full ratification and referendum process established by 
             California State law, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 27, 2016

   Mr. LaMalfa (for himself, Mr. Ruiz, Mr. Denham, Mr. Cook, and Mr. 
   Huffman) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                     Committee on Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
     To amend the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act to require that, in 
 California, certain off-reservation gaming proposals shall be subject 
    to the full ratification and referendum process established by 
             California State law, and for other purposes.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``California Compact Protection Act''.

SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

    Congress finds the following:
            (1) With the passage of the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act 
        (25 U.S.C. 2701 et seq.), Congress provided a statutory basis 
        for the operation of gaming by federally recognized Indian 
        tribes as a means of promoting tribal economic development, 
        self-sufficiency, and strong tribal governments.
            (2) The Indian Gaming Regulatory Act defines three classes 
        of gaming, specifying that class III gaming may only be 
        conducted in States that have authorized gaming and pursuant to 
        Tribal-State compacts negotiated in good faith through the 
        government-to-government relationship between federally 
        recognized Indian tribes and States.
            (3) With the passage of Proposition 1A in 2000, the voters 
        of California amended the State Constitution to authorize the 
        operation of class III gaming by federally recognized Indian 
        tribes on Indian lands in California in accordance with Federal 
        law. Proposition 1A also authorized the Governor of California 
        to negotiate gaming compacts with such tribes, subject to 
        ratification by the State legislature.
            (4) Under California law, actions by the State legislature, 
        including the ratification of gaming compacts, are subject to 
        California's referendum process. Under that process, the State 
        legislature's ratification of a gaming compact does not go into 
        effect if California voters qualify a referendum vote on that 
        compact. If such a referendum is qualified, the Compact only 
        goes into effect after voter approval of the legislature's 
        decision.
            (5) This referendum process serves as a form of democratic 
        oversight of the California Governor and State legislature.
            (6) In passing the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act, Congress 
        intended to respect the individual States' authority to 
        determine their own public policy and to negotiate and conclude 
        gaming compacts pursuant to each State's laws.
            (7) The Tribal-State gaming compact process in California 
        is undermined if the Secretary of the Interior prescribes 
        Federal procedures under which class III gaming may be 
        conducted on the land made eligible for Indian gaming pursuant 
        to section 20(b)(1)(A) of the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (25 
        U.S.C. 2719 (b)(1)(A)), when the compact for gaming on that 
        land was not ratified by the State Legislature or was rejected 
        by a constitutionally called referendum.
            (8) Congress reaffirms the importance of section 
        20(b)(1)(A) of the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (25 U.S.C. 
        2719(b)(1)(A)), the statutory authority by which federally 
        recognized Indian tribes can acquire certain gaming lands 
        eligible for gaming purposes outside of their reservation 
        boundaries. This section provides State and tribal governments 
        with the flexibility to locate tribal government gaming 
        facilities on newly acquired land at the most appropriate 
        locations. However, Congress did not intend for this section to 
        allow for tribal gaming facilities on after-acquired lands over 
        the express objection of the voters of the State.
            (9) It is in the interest of the Federal Government, 
        States, and federally recognized Indian tribes that Congress 
        require that, in California, off-reservation gaming proposals 
        be subject to the full ratification and referendum process 
        established by California State law.

SEC. 3. LIMITATION ON ACTION BY THE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR ABSENT A 
              VALID COMPACT.

    (a) Prohibition on Certain Class III Gaming.--Section 11(d)(7)(B) 
of the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (25 U.S.C. 2710(d)(7)(B)) is 
amended by inserting after clause (vii) the following:
    ``(viii) Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, for any 
land in California on which Indian gaming was authorized under (25 
U.S.C. 2719(b)(1)(A)) and for which the Legislature of the State of 
California did not ratify a proposed class III Tribal-State gaming 
compact or for which the electorate of California rejected the approval 
of a class III Tribal-State gaming compact through a constitutionally 
valid referendum, the Secretary may not--
            ``(I) prescribe class III gaming procedures;
            ``(II) approve a class III gaming compact; or
            ``(III) consider a class III gaming compact to have been 
        approved by the Secretary, if the Secretary does not approve or 
        disapprove the compact before the date that is 45 days after 
        the date on which the compact is submitted.''.
    (b) Clarification.--Nothing in this Act or the amendment made by 
subsection (a) shall be interpreted to impact the implementation of 
authorities under the Act of June 18, 1934 (commonly known as the 
``Indian Reorganization Act''), or any other section of the Indian 
Gaming Regulatory Act.
    (c) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) shall be 
effective as of April 27, 2016.
                                 <all>
```