What's new
Streak Gaming Online Gambling Forum

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

‘No on Proposition 26’ campaign releases statement commending California voters

Users who viewed this discussion (Total:0)


Staff member
Jan 17, 2008
Source - GamingAmerica

The campaign said voters made the right choice by rejecting the proposal.
The “No on Proposition 26” campaign has issued a statement after California voters voted against a proposal to give tribal locations
exclusive rights to operate state-wide Sports Betting. Union members, business organizations and veterans, along with city and local elected
officials opposed Proposition 26 (Prop 26) due to a contingency that could potentially result in job loss throughout the state.

The California Contract Cities Association, Gateway Cities Council of Governments, AFSCME California, Disabled American Veterans,
California Hispanic Chamber of Commerce and the Los Angeles County Business Federation were among a large coalition of organizations opposed to Prop 26.

Opponents of Prop 26 also argued: “ [Prop 26] went well beyond Sports Betting with a proposed massive expansion of gambling by
five wealthy tribal casinos, which also contained a poison pill designed to gain market share over their competitors.”

The campaign said in its statement: “California voters were not fooled by Prop 26 and soundly rejected it.

“Prop 26 was not just a Sports Betting measure but a massive expansion of gambling by five wealthy tribes that included a poison pill
aimed at taking market share away from highly regulated cardrooms that provide millions of dollars in tax revenue to communities and
tens of thousands of jobs. Voters made it clear; Prop 26 is bad for communities, jobs, and California.”

Juan Garza, California Cities for Self-Reliance Joint Powers Authority representing: Bell Gardens, Commerce, Compton, Cudahy and
Hawaiian Gardens agreed with “No on Proposition 26” and noted that its hidden provisos posed potential harm for state residents.

Garza commented: “As the representative of five cities that rely on cardrooms to fund vital city services, we are thrilled California voters agreed with us and rejected Prop 26.

“Prop 26 had a hidden poison pill that allows for unlimited lawsuits against cardrooms – a highly regulated industry that provides critical tax revenue for cities and jobs across California. We are thankful to voters for rejecting Prop 26 which would have significantly harmed so many California communities.”