Indian Gaming Regulatory Act Amendments of 2004
Latest action. Read twice and referred to the Committee on Indian Affairs. (text of measure as introduced: continuing resolutionA stopgap law funding the government at existing levels when the annual appropriations bills are not done by October 1.Read the full definition (opens a new tab) S3182-3184)
Indian Gaming Regulatory Act Amendments of 2004 - Amends the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act to define a regulated person or entity to be a Indian tribe, a tribal operator of an Indian gaming operation, or any related management contractor or associated person, including certain concessionaires.
Revises procedures for filling vacancies on the National Indian Gaming Commission and the powers of the Chairman.
Directs the Commission to monitor, inspect, and access records of class III gaming. Authorizes it, in the case of contumacy by, or refusal to obey any subpoena issued to, any person, to request the Attorney General to invoke the jurisdiction of any U.S. court to compel compliance.
Authorizes the Commission to accept gifts on its behalf, subject to specified prohibitions.
Requires the Commission to develop a nonbinding minimum five-year regulatory plan to carry out its activities.
Adjusts the salary of the General Counsel to the Commission and of other staff.
Requires Commission Chairman approval of any tribal gaming ordinance that provides for a system ensuring background investigations and continuing oversight of tribal gaming commissioners and key tribal gaming commission employees (as well as primary management officials and key employees of a class II gaming enterprise, as under current law).
Allows an Indian tribe to enter into a management contract for the operation and management of a class III gaming activity, subject to specified requirements currently applicable to class II gaming management contracts.
Revises the authority of the Chairman to levy and collect appropriate civil fines up to $25,000 per violation to specify up to $25,000 per violation, per day. Authorizes the Chairman to issue orders: (1) requiring accounting and disgorgement, including interest; and (2) of reprimand, censure, or the placement of limitations on gaming activities and functions of any regulated person or entity for violations of Federal law or Commission or tribal regulations or ordinances.
Requires the Commission to provide the regulated person or entity (currently, the tribal operator of an Indian game or a management contractor) with a written complaint if the Commission has reason to believe that such person or entity is engaged in specified activities.
The summary continues for 2 more paragraphs. Read it in full on Congress.gov
Written by analysts at the Congressional Research Service and published on Congress.gov, not by Civibrief. Summarized at the "Introduced in Senate" stage on March 25, 2004. It describes the bill, it is not the legal text.
Where is it in the process, and what happens next?
4 steps remain before this bill could become law.
The record's latest action, on March 25, 2004: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Indian Affairs. (text of measure as introduced: CR S3182-3184)
- Clearing the committees it was referred to, and being scheduled for a floor vote
- Passage by the Senate
- Passage by the House
- The President's signature. If the President vetoes it, two-thirds of both chambers must vote to override.
How likely is it to become law?
Civibrief does not forecast outcomes and this page has no opinion about this one. What the record supports is a base rate, which is a fact about the whole pile, not a prediction about this measure.
In the 108th Congress (2003-04), 498 of the 8,623 bills and joint resolutions introduced became law, about 5.8 percent. That count covers every measure at every stage, including the many that never left committee.
This one is not there yet: 4 steps are still outstanding, listed above.
Has anyone actually voted on it?
No. No roll call in this Congress cites this measure. That is the ordinary outcome: most measures never reach a recorded floor vote, and a committee ends most of them simply by not acting.
A vote is not the only thing that happens to a measure. Hearings, markups, and referrals are all recorded actions, and none of them is a vote of the full chamber.
Who is behind it?
BEN CAMPBELL (R-CO) introduced it on March 25, 2004. No cosponsors are recorded.
Cosponsoring is a formal signature on the text. It is not a commitment to vote for the measure, it does not bind anyone's party, and a long list of cosponsors is a measure of attention rather than of prospects.
How long has it been in play?
It was introduced on March 25, 2004, 8204 days ago. The most recent recorded action was 8204 days ago, on March 25, 2004.
Measures do not carry over. Anything the 108th Congress has not finished by January 3, 2005 dies when the term ends, and has to be introduced again from the start in the next Congress.
Every answer above is assembled from this measure's own record on Congress.gov and from published counts of what Congress has passed before. Civibrief does not predict outcomes and takes no position on any measure.
Vote history
- SenateIntroduced, no floor vote yet
- HouseAwaits Senate passage
- PresidentAwaits both chambers