Much as I have a high regard for Assemblyman Fred Thiele and his record of public service, first as Southampton Town supervisor and subsequently as New York State Assemblyman, I must disagree with his position on the Shinnecock casino project, as stated in his letter to The Press of February 12 ["A Fair Question"].
Mr. Thiele's objection to the project on the grounds that gambling is environmentally adverse (golf course or other development is hardly any better) and inimical to the social fabric (tell that to state lotteries throughout the land) is hardly convincing.
State governments don't give a hoot about the moral implications of gambling—by lottery or casino—and New York established its lottery to finance, of all things, the "education" of its children, although much of the proceeds seems to be diverted to other uses. It is hardly acceptable to hold the Shinnecock tribe (another sovereign entity) to a higher moral standard, or to do so with a straight face.
The very idea of proposing to the Shinnecocks alternatives to their casino project is insultingly patronizing. After all, they are a sovereign entity recognized by the State of New York. How would it be, say, if the project had been proposed by Donald Trump? Would anyone dare to suggest to him alternatives to his gambling project? Is this not free-market, free-enterprise America?
The Shinnecocks are accused of being "confrontational." I would be confrontational were someone to presume to tell me (not being in statu pupillari) what was good for me, what activity I should engage in or how I should use my money—if I did not ask their advice. The Shinnecocks are a sovereign nation, not children in need of adult advice, and there is no state or federal law against casinos and the gambling that goes on in them.
The Shinnecocks have a right to establish a casino on their property without the unsolicited and unwanted advice of meddlers. If there are applicable federal laws or procedures in the matter it is for the federal, not the state, government to decide. Which is where the matter now stands.
Mr. Thiele makes much of his practice of polling his constituents on public affairs, including the Shinnecocks' casino project. Excellent idea though that may be, yet, given the constitutional and legal status of the Shinnecock tribe, his constituents have no legal standing in the matter, whatever may be their opinions about the casino.
It is curious that the Southampton Town government is mum on the only reasonable solution to its environmental concerns regarding the casino project: alternative land outside the hamlet of Hampton Bays, preferably some site near Gabreski Airport, for example. Or is it that no one wants the Shinnecocks to make what is considered "a large amount of money" from their casino project—a project that would bring in large amounts of revenue to the town, the state and the federal government? Would that not be cutting off one's nose to spite one's face? This is the impression that is given by all the fuss and buzz over the casino project. Or is the objective to keep the Shinnecocks forever dependent on state handouts? One should hope not as that would be contrary to what all Americans supposedly hold dear: dignity, initiative and self-support.
DAVID CARNEY
Sag Harbor
Copyright The Southampton Press