The Opponents of Proposition 5
THE OPPONENTS OF PROPOSITION 5 AN ANALYSIS OF CAMPAIGN EXPENDITURES IN OPPOSITION TO PROPOSITION 5 Christopher E. Skinnell The Rose Institute of State and Local Government Claremont McKenna College INTRODUCTION During the 1998 campaign season, dozens of news articles were written about the fact that Proposition 5 (Indian Gaming Compacts) had broken all previous records for spending on an initiative: all told, more than $92 million.1 The vast majority of the media coverage2 focused on the substantial expenditures of California’s Indian tribes in support of Proposition 5: $66,257,088 to be precise.3 Very much less was written about the nature of the opposition to Proposition 5. In previous years, any group that spent in excess of $25 million dollars on an initiative would have been big news, but “No on 5” forces were given little scrutiny. This study aims to correct that imbalance. This report shows that the opposition to Proposition 5 consisted of a few very well financed special interests: labor unions,4 casinos (California and 1 Secretary of State’s website, [http://www.ss.ca.gov/prd/bmprimary98_final/Prop_5.htm], September 28, 1999. 2 Consider, for example, these one-sided articles: Dan Morain, “Handful of Tribes Broke Initiative Spending Record” Los Angeles Times, February 6, 1999, p. 18.; Robert B. Gunnison, “Indian Tribes Stake a Bundle on Campaign to Pass Proposition 5.”, San Francisco Chronicle, October 23, 1998, p. A24.; Tim Cornwell, “US Indians Gamble 40M Dollars on Vote to Boost Casinos”, The Scotsman, October 17, 1998, p. 13; and Tom Gorman, “Tribes Spending Heavily on Casino Measure,” Los Angeles Times, August 4, 1998, Home Edition, p.
[Show full text]