lowa Tribe of Oklahoma 

335588 E. 750 Rd. 

Perkins, Oklahoma 74059-3268 

(405) 547-2402 

August 15,2013 

Ms. Tracie Stevens, Chairwoman 

Mr. Daniel Little, Associate Commissioner 

National lndian Gaming Commission 

1441 L St. NW, Suite 9100 

Washington, DC 20005 

Re: Comments on Proposed One-Touch Bingo Reinterpretation 

Dear Commissioners: 

The lowa Tribe of Oklahoma ("Tribe") is pleased to submit the following comments on the 

National lndian Gaming Commission's ("NIGC") proposal to classify one-touch bingo as "Class II 

gaming," as that term is defined in the lndian Gaming Regulatory Act ("IGRA") and its 

implementing regulations. The proposal is a welcomed step towards resolving the uncertainty 

regarding electronic one-touch aids used in conjunction with Class II bingo games. For the 

reasons set forth below, we support the proposal in its present form and encourage the NlGC 

to move forward in its implementation. 

For years, there has been significant disagreement between tribal governments and the NlGC 

concerning whether Class I1 bingo includes electronic bingo games in which the player must 

only press one button to wager and play. For tribal governments, the classification of such 

games seemed straightforward and unambiguous. The one-touch feature had no bearing 

whatsoever on the essential character of the game, which remained the same regardless of the 

number of times a button was pressed. Moreover, the one-touch feature was merely a product 

of evolving technology designed to aid in the play of Class II games. In enacting IGRA, Congress 

not only anticipated, but in fact intended for the game of bingo to evolve with changing 

technology, as evidenced by the statement that tribes be permitted "maximum flexibility" in 

utilizing advancements in Class II gaming. 
In spite of the foregoing, the NlGC issued a decision on June 4, 2008, which classified one-touch 

bingo games as Class Ill electronic facsimiles. The NIGC's classification decision was based, in 

large part, on the fact that players were not required to take a separate step to "cover" the 

numbers as they were called. 

According to the 2008 letter, the game did not come within the meaning of "Class II bingo" 

because it did not require players to participate and compete with each other by taking an 

additional step to cover drawn numbers. Without the requisite element of "competition," the 

game fell outside the Class II bingo definition and operated as a Class Ill electronic facsimile. 

The NIGC's 2008 decision was the cause of growing concern and unease throughout the tribal 

gaming industry, particularly for those tribal governments looking to use Class II games as 

leverage in compact negotiations. The NIGC's current proposal, however, seeks to bring an end 

to this controversy by clarifying that bingo is bingo, regardless of the underlying technology or 

the number of times a button is pressed. We therefore welcome this proposal and commend 

the NlGC for its efforts to bring greater clarity and certainty to the legal framework governing 

Class II gaming. 

In particular, we commend the NlGC for articulating a more principled basis for distinguishing 

between Class II electronic aids and Class Ill facsimiles. One of the primary objections to the 

2008 classification decision was that it imposed requirements substantially beyond that which 

was required under IGRA. However, as stated in the proposal and affirmed by various federal 

circuits, "IGRA's three explicit criteria.. . constitute the sole legal requirements for a game to 

count as class II bingo." Thus, the superficial or electronic features of a bingo game are 

irrelevant for purposes of classifying games under IGRA. The sole and dispositive question is 

whether the game meets the three statutory requirements for Class II bingo. 
We also commend the NlGC for recognizing that a manual "cover" requirement is not an 

appropriate criteria for classification purposes. Such recognition is consistent with federal 

court rulings allowing Class II aids to assist the player by automatically covering numbers after 

they are drawn. Nothing in IGRA or its implementing regulations prescribes the method by 

which a player must cover drawn numbers. To the contrary, the NIGC's regulations expressly 

permit a Class II aid that "[alssists a player or the playing of a game." 

In closing, we wish to reiterate our strong support for the proposed reinterpretation, which 

seeks to bring the NIGC's policy on one-touch bingo games more in line with IGRA, legislative 

history, federal case law, and the NIGC's current regulations. We are encouraged by the NIGC's 

responsiveness to tribal concerns regarding the one-touch bingo controversy and its willingness 

to adopt the tribal position on this issue. We hope the NlGC will continue its outreach efforts 

to engage tribal governments on these and other matters of common importance. 

Thank you for your attention to these comments. 

Sincerely, 

Gary Pratt 

Iowa Tribe of Oklahoma 

Chairman