Opinion: Negotiate Class III casino compact with Poarch Creeks

I have a 30-year record of opposing public, for-profit gambling (apart from horse racing, which for better or worse has a long cultural history behind it). You name it – casinos, lotteries, video poker – if it's not a private game, and if there's a "house" or state-sponsorship, then I'm against it, for reasons numerous enough to require an entire, separate column.

But Indian tribes, for valid historical reasons, do enjoy some sovereign rights. They have often used that sovereignty to run gambling operations, subject to certain restrictions by the states in which they operate. I think they err in doing so, but that's their choice.

Right now, Alabama restricts them to electronic bingo games only. Frankly, if gambling must be allowed, that is the least civilizing form. Conversely, blackjack and similar games require human interaction and human judgment, and create more jobs. If there must be Poarch Creek gambling, it might as well include card games. They certainly won't harm the public weal any more than electronic bingo already does.

What surely would be harmful, though, is expansion of gambling (and state lotteries) beyond the confines of Indian areas. At least Indian gambling is limited both geographically and in terms of an ethical recognition of their due sovereignty. Yet now comes state Senate President Pro Tem Del Marsh, trying to solve perpetual budget problems, to propose a widespread expansion of gambling (beyond Indian control) and a lottery.