Keep the Promise Act of 2013 facts for kids
![]() |
|
Full title | To prohibit gaming activities on certain Indian lands in Arizona until the expiration of certain gaming compacts. |
---|---|
Introduced in | 113th United States Congress |
Introduced on | April 9, 2013 |
Sponsored by | Rep. Trent Franks (R, AZ-8) |
Number of co-sponsors | 5 |
Effects and codifications | |
Act(s) affected | Indian Gaming Regulatory Act |
Agencies affected | United States Congress, United States Department of the Interior, |
Legislative history | |
|
The Keep the Promise Act of 2013 (H.R. 1410) was a proposed law in the United States House of Representatives. It was introduced during the 113th United States Congress. This bill aimed to stop new casinos from being built on Native American land in the Phoenix, Arizona area.
Specifically, it would have prevented the Tohono O'odham Nation from building a casino. They had bought land in Phoenix in 2003. They were trying to get this land officially recognized as a reservation. This step is needed before a casino can be built. Many people saw this bill as being aimed directly at the Tohono O'odham Nation.
Contents
What the Bill Was About
The Keep the Promise Act of 2013 had a clear goal. It wanted to stop certain types of gambling activities, like casinos. This ban would apply to land in the Phoenix, Arizona, area. It would affect land that the government (Secretary of the Interior) acquired for a Native American tribe after April 9, 2013.
The bill stated that this ban would end on January 1, 2027. This means it was not meant to be a permanent ban.
How the Bill Moved Through Congress
This section explains the steps the bill took in the House of Representatives.
In the House of Representatives
Representative Trent Franks from Arizona introduced the Keep the Promise Act of 2013. This happened in the House of Representatives on April 9, 2013.
After being introduced, the bill was sent to two groups. These were the United States House Committee on Natural Resources and its smaller group, the Subcommittee on Indian and Alaska Native Affairs.
The subcommittee held meetings to discuss the bill on May 16, 2013. Later, on July 24, 2013, the full committee met. They discussed the bill and voted to send it forward. The vote was 35 in favor and 5 against.
On September 13, 2013, the House Majority Leader, Eric Cantor, scheduled the bill for a vote. It was set to be considered on September 17 under a special rule. This rule allows for a faster vote.
Why People Debated This Bill
The bill caused a lot of discussion. Its main impact would have been to stop the Tohono O'odham tribe from building their casino. This casino was planned for land they bought in Phoenix in 2003. Many believed the bill was specifically targeting them.
In 2002, voters in Arizona approved a law called Proposition 202. This law changed some rules about casinos in Arizona. At that time, Native American tribes in Arizona also made an agreement. They agreed to limit the number of casinos built. However, people disagreed on how legally binding this agreement was. Opponents of the Tohono O'odham casino saw it as breaking this agreement.
Native American casinos can only be built on official reservations. The Department of the Interior approved the Tohono O'odham tribe's land purchase. They also approved making it a reservation. This was in response to a 1986 federal law. That law allowed the tribe to get more land. It was to make up for land damaged by a federal dam.
Arguments Against the Bill
People who opposed the bill had several reasons. Tom McClintock, a Representative from California, argued against it. He believed the bill would hurt job creation. He also felt it would break a promise made to the Tohono O'odham tribe.
Ned Norris Jr., the Chairman of the Tohono O'odham Nation, also spoke against the bill. He called it "special interest legislation." This means he thought it was designed to help certain groups. He said it would create a "no-competition zone." This would benefit the two tribes that already had casinos in that area.
Arguments For the Bill
Supporters of the bill also had their reasons. Gregory Mendoza, the Governor of the Gila River Indian Community, supported it. He believed that the agreement not to build more casinos should be respected.
The Tohono O'odham Nation argued that federal rules allowed them to build casinos. This applied to reservation land created after October 17, 1988. This is allowed if the land is part of a settlement for a land claim. The Nation claimed their West Valley land was partial replacement. It was to settle a claim for about 10,000 acres of their land. This land was flooded when the Painted Rock Dam was built on the Gila River.