|
October 25, 2002
|
Tribal
PAC contributions for 2002 Minn. elections total $261,300 as of August
19th
(reports
as of October 21st due this week)
Alleged campaign finance
irregularities include Mille Lacs
chief executive Melanie Benjamin’s campaign contributions to Oberstar
by Clara NiiSka
The profitability of Indian
gambling operations in Minnesota depends on a state-sanctioned monopoly
on
casino gambling. The political
volatility of such gambling monopolies has combined with the huge
cash-flow and
lucrative profitability of some Indian casinos, the BIA’s historical
legacy of
corrupt political ‘machines,’ and the high costs of campaigning in
television
ads to change the face of politics.
Mille Lacs band chief executive
Melanie Benjamin is among the tribal officials against whom a formal
complaint
was filed with the Federal Elections Commission on October 23rd. Melanie’s campaign contributions to
candidate James Oberstar were in excess of the legal limits, according
to the
documents filed by Twin Cities activists David Hoch and Joseph Marble. Citing information posted online by the
Center for Responsive Politics (http://www.opensecrets.org) and the
Federal
Election Commission (http://www.fec.gov/finance_reports.html), Hoch and
Marble
complain that, “Ms. Benjamin contributed $1,000 on 01/15/02, and
another $1,000
on 04/05/02, both to James Oberstar’s General Election Fund,
and
on 094/05/02, another $1,000 to James Oberstar’s Primary Election
Fund.” Democratic Congressman
Oberstar, whose 8th
Congressional District encompasses both Mille Lacs and Leech Lake,
explains on
his campaign website that his “number one
priority as a U.S. Representative is to improve the quality of life for
the
people who sent him to Washington DC on their behalf.”
Press/ON called
Melanie Benjamin, explained that
a formal
complaint had been filed, and asked her about the campaign
contributions. She said that she had not
yet seen the
complaint, so this writer read the relevant portions over the phone. Melanie declined to comment, explaining, “I
have to see it first, before I can respond to it. It’s
only proper for me” to read it carefully before
commenting. She said that the band’s
mail “is not delivered until 11:00.” Press/ON
faxed the complaint, but Melanie, who told this writer that she would
be leaving
the office to meet with elders, had not responded by press time.
Press/ON also
asked Melanie about the reasons
for her
support for Rep. Oberstar. She
responded in terms of “government relations,” explaining that “we have
a
strategy of how we contribute” to political candidates.
“You are looking at one specific candidate,”
she said of Press/ON’s questions about Oberstar, “but we have a
series
of candidates” we support.
Hoch
and Marble’s complaint also cites “failure of affiliated federal PACs
to report
as one unit,” specifically including two lobbyists’ PACs which
they say
interlock with the Mille Lacs Band’s PAC (Mah Mah Wi No Mind Fund):
Lockridge,
Grindal, Nauen, et al., and Holland and Knight.
The
other group of affiliated PACs addressed by the complaint includes five
tribal
PACs which, according to Hoch and Marble, “are all members of
the National
Indian Gaming Assoc.”: the Mashantucket Pequot Tribe, the
Tunica-Biloxi
Tribe of Louisiana, the San Manuel Mission Band of Indians, the
Pojoaque Pueblo
Indian Tribe, and the Mille Lacs Band.
Details
of Minnesota campaign contributions, compiled by Hoch and Marble, are
printed
in this issue.
Controversy over the folding green political
influence being wielded by Indian gambling enterprises and tribal
governments
is not limited to Minnesota. During
just the past month there have been dozens of news reports of campaign
finance
problems rooted in ‘Indian country.’
In Oklahoma, employees of the
Choctaw tribe claimed
they were pressured or “forced” to make contributions to the campaign
funds of
U.S. Senator Jim Inhofe and Rep. Brad Carson, and campaign records show
six
Choctaw tribal executives contributed a combined $3,000 to Carson’s
campaign.
In Idaho, where Indian gambling is a
hot issue,
Democrat Bruce Perry fueled ongoing controversy over campaign finances
with his
“drive for $49.90 contributions,” whose donors do not have to be
identified
under state law, and tribal leaders from Coeur d’Alene and Nez Perce
have
pumped more than $2 million into this year’s political campaigns.
In Arizona, Congressman J.D.
Hayworth has received
more than a quarter of a million dollars from tribes, tribal PACs and
their
lobbyists in 14 states. National Indian
Gaming Association lobbyist John Harte reportedly described Hayworth as
“a good
friend of Indians.”
In California, the Agua Caliente
band of Cahuilla
Indians has made more than half a million dollars in campaign
contributions to
encourage construction of a rail line mass-transporting gamblers from
Los
Angeles to their casino. The band is
being sued by the Fair Political Practices Commission for not
disclosing
recipients of another $7.5 million in lobbying contributions, which the
band
was late in reporting. Auga attorneys
argue that, as a sovereign nation, the band is not obligated to comply
with the
state’s political reform laws.
In New Mexico, Democratic
gubernatorial candidate
Bill Richardson has raised hefty contributions from Indian gambling
interests,
including $40,000 from Sandia Pueblo.
And in Colorado, Sen. Ben Nighthorse
Campbell was
among the beneficiaries of lucrative campaign contributions from the
Connecticut Mohegans, including collecting $20,500 from Mohegan
contractors
during a one-day appearance at the Mohegan Sun casino, according to the
Connecticut
Post. Sen. Dan Inouye, who chairs
the Senate Indian Affairs Committee, got $10,000 at the same event. Inouye apparently sees nothing wrong with
the tribe and their contractors making contributions, defending his
acceptance
of hefty sums by asking, “Indians can’t, but Enron can?”
Controversy
over Indians’ political contributions is also not new to Minnesota.
Former
Red Lake tribal council chairman Roger Jourdain came to power in
1958-1959 on a
platform of governmental reform focused on the General Council
established,
according to longtime secretary Peter Graves, by the selfsame Peter
Graves. [Graves published a souvenir
poster version of the 1918 Red Lake Constitution memorializing himself
as
founding father, illustrated with a photo of Graves wearing a Plains
Indian
feathered headdress and identified as “Chief Graves.”]
Postwar
reformer Roger Jourdain was backed on-reservation by the Young Man’s
Council,
in coalition with others concerned about the tightly centralized power
controlled through Peter Graves and his family. Off-reservation,
Roger was backed by the DFL machine of the late
1950s, and according to one scholar who talked with him about the Red
Lake
tribal council at some length in the early 1960s, Roger’s rise to power
was
fueled by the support of up-and-coming DFL heavyweight Hubert H.
Humphrey.
The
power brokers’ deal benefited those who made it. The
BIA got the Indian Reorganization Act form of government for
which it had been agitating since the 1930s. Roger,
backed by political heavyweights in
Washington, D.C., reigned for
nearly thirty years as chairman of what many on the reservation came to
consider a dictatorship.
In
February 1981, Roger and his Red Lake DFL Committee made legal history
in the
arena of campaign finance when the Minnesota Supreme Court ruled in the
case of
the State of Minnesota, by its Minnesota State Ethical
Practices
Board v. The Red
Lake DFL
Committee (303 N.W.2d 54).
In November 1978, the Red Lake DFL Committee purchased two
full-page political advertisements in the Bemidji Pioneer,
for “over
$100.” According to court records, the
advertisements were addressed “TO ALL MINNESOTA INDIAN VOTERS” and
urged “all
the DFL'ers and Independents” to vote for the DFL candidates for
governor, the
state legislature, and the U.S. Congress.
The DFL Committee ignored requests that it comply with
Minnesota laws governing campaign finance, so the Minnesota State
Ethical
Practices Board brought legal action seeking a mandatory injunction
against the
Committee and its then-treasurer, Lummy Oliver. In December 1979,
committee
president Roger Jourdain was served with papers when he was
off-reservation (at
Grand Rapids, Minnesota). Roger and his Committee ignored the state
Ethical
Practices Board and the state court proceedings. After
a default hearing, Roger and the DFL Committee were ordered
to comply with state law when engaging in off-reservation political
activity. The court’s order was personally
served on Roger in Bemidji. Soon after, the Committee moved to vacate
the
judgment, asserting the state court lacked jurisdiction over political
activities taking place in Minnesota. The Ethical Practices Board, in
turn,
moved for an order finding the Committee and Roger in contempt for
willful
noncompliance with the December 17 order.
On February 25, 1980, the
state trial court filed an order finding that it properly had
jurisdiction, and
also concluding that the DFL Committee and Roger were in civil contempt
for
their failure to comply with an earlier order directing that the
Committee
register with the State Ethical Practices Board as a political
committee or
register a political fund, select and identify a treasurer in
accordance with
state law, and file a report of the Committee’s receipts and
expenditures for
1978.
Roger and the Red
Lake DFL Committee appealed. On February 13, 1981, the
Minnesota Supreme Court affirmed the district court’s determination
that the
Committee’s activities were subject to Minnesota statutes, writing
that,
“plainly, the activities put in motion by the Committee were not
confined to
the reservation nor were they intended to be so circumscribed.” The Committee intended to cause
“something to occur beyond the reservation boundaries, namely, the
dissemination of a political message, which is the activity here sought
to be
regulated.”
The Minnesota Supreme Court ruled that, “even if some
interference [with tribal self-government] had been shown, the public
interest
in protecting the integrity of the election process, particularly
through
disclosure of significant financial influences on elected officials, is
a
compelling public concern.” When the Red Lake Band
participates in state
elections, it “has the same interest as other voters in the integrity
of that
process, and has a corresponding obligation to comply with state laws
which
govern that process and guard its integrity.”
Eight years later, in 1989, the Shakopee Sioux Community
formed a PAC for the purpose of making political contributions to
recipients
outside the reservation. In 1996, the
Minnesota
Campaign Finance and Public Disclosure Board learned that a political
party had
received an undisclosed $27,500 contribution from the Shakopee PAC. The Minnesota Campaign Finance Board
informed Susan Totenhagen, then secretary-treasurer at Shakopee and
treasurer
of the PAC, that the Shakopee council was required to make disclosures
pursuant
to Minnesota state law governing contributions made by unregistered
associations. The political party returned the $27,500 to the community
council, which turned it over to the PAC, and the PAC contributed it to
the
political party, reporting the contribution but likewise making no
financial
disclosures to the Board.
The Campaign Finance Board informed Totenhagen that the
Shakopee council was obliged either to register as a Committee and be
subject
to disclosure requirements or to provide financial disclosures to the
PAC when
supplying funds for political contributions. The tribal council then
requested
an advisory opinion.
In May 1998, the Campaign Finance Board issued Advisory
Opinion 290, stating that the Shakopee community council is a
“statutory
association notwithstanding” the Shakopee Dakota community’s “status as
a
sovereign entity”; that is not required to register or to provide
all the
financial disclosures specified in Minnesota Statutes; but that it
is
required to “make modified disclosures concerning the sources of funds
comprising political contributions including naming either the donating
entity
and the nature of its business or the donating individual.” The Board
also
issued an order requiring the PAC to either to return the $ 27,500 to
Shakopee
or to obtain disclosures of the sources of funds.
Attorneys for the Shakopee community council (and Mystic
Lake casino) appealed – and lost. On
November 24, 1998, the Minnesota Court of Appeals ruled that in the
case Shakopee
Mdewakanton Sioux (Dakota) Community, et al. vs. Minnesota Campaign Finance and
Public
Disclosure Board (586 N.W.2d 406) that “an Indian tribe” is required
“to make disclosures concerning the sources of funds used for political
contributions pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 10A.20 (1996).”
And, on October 23, 2002, a complaint was filed with the
Federal Elections Commission about campaign contributions made by Mille
Lacs
band chief executive Melanie Benjamin.
The complainants Hoch and Marble are influential in the
organization “Citizens United for Baseball in Minnesota” and,
reportedly, are
interested in generating income from state-sponsored gambling
operations to
fund a new baseball stadium.
Are the campaign contributions made in Melanie Benjamin’s
name the “third strike” for vested interests wielding unaccountable
political
power through tribal government’s unregistered campaign contributions
in state
and federal elections?
Just as Press/ON was going to press, Tadd Johnson,
special counsel to the Mille Lacs Band in Hinkley, called this writer. He explained the excess personal
contributions allegedly made by Mille Lacs chief executive Melanie
Benjamin to
Congressman James Oberstar.
Johnson said that the April 5, 2002 contributions were
done by the National Unity Caucus, an Indian PAC of which Melanie is
treasurer,
“so she signs the checks.” But if the
FEC recorded them as personal contributions, that’s incorrect, the
attorney
said. “She signed them as treasurer, and she did not contribute as an
individual.”
The January 15, 2002 check, according to Johnson, is a
Mille Lacs band check, he believes to be from the Mille Lacs band’s
PAC, rather
than Melanie Benjamin’s personal funds.
Johnson said that as far as he knows, Melanie has not
made any political contributions as an individual.
|
|
|
|
