How Did Tribal Casinos Respond to the First Wave of the COVID-19 Pandemic?

Session Title

Poster Session

Presentation Type

Poster Presentation

Location

Park MGM, Las Vegas, NV

Start Date

24-5-2023 10:30 AM

End Date

24-5-2023 11:15 AM

Disciplines

Business | Medicine and Health Sciences

Abstract

Abstract: During the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in the Spring of 2020, state governors across the United States issued executive orders forcing bars and restaurants to close. Because tribal governments are sovereign and independent of state governments, state executive orders do not apply on tribal lands. Policy makers and pundits often critique tribal sovereignty as granting tribal governments free reign to make decisions that benefit Native communities at the expense of non-Natives. The first wave of the pandemic provided us with the opportunity to compare tribal and state government responses to determine which kind of government was more likely to make economic sacrifices to address a public health emergency. We collected data on 498 casinos closure and reopening dates and compared them to the responses of the 28 states that share boundaries with tribal land. We found that tribal governments, on average, acted faster to close casinos and waited significantly longer to reopen. We conclude that, contrary to the concerns of some critics, tribal governments made swifter and stronger economic sacrifices to prevent the spread of COVID-19.

Implications of the material: Our research on tribal casino closures during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic demonstrates that tribal governments were more likely than state governments to prioritize public health over economic development.

Keywords

COVID-19, casinos, pandemic, response

Author Bios

Savannah Supan is a Nutrition major at the College of St. Benedict, where she is a research assistant for the College of St. Benedict’s and St. John’s University’s Initiative for Native Nation Relations.

Theodor Gordon, PhD, is the Joseph P Farry Professor of Public Policy and Civic Engagement at the College of St. Benedict and St. John’s University, where he also serves as the Director of the Initiative for Native Nation Relations. He is the author of Cahuilla Nation Activism and The Tribal Casino Movement (University of Nevada Press).

Funding Sources

None.

Competing Interests

None.

Share

COinS
 
May 24th, 10:30 AM May 24th, 11:15 AM

How Did Tribal Casinos Respond to the First Wave of the COVID-19 Pandemic?

Park MGM, Las Vegas, NV

Abstract: During the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in the Spring of 2020, state governors across the United States issued executive orders forcing bars and restaurants to close. Because tribal governments are sovereign and independent of state governments, state executive orders do not apply on tribal lands. Policy makers and pundits often critique tribal sovereignty as granting tribal governments free reign to make decisions that benefit Native communities at the expense of non-Natives. The first wave of the pandemic provided us with the opportunity to compare tribal and state government responses to determine which kind of government was more likely to make economic sacrifices to address a public health emergency. We collected data on 498 casinos closure and reopening dates and compared them to the responses of the 28 states that share boundaries with tribal land. We found that tribal governments, on average, acted faster to close casinos and waited significantly longer to reopen. We conclude that, contrary to the concerns of some critics, tribal governments made swifter and stronger economic sacrifices to prevent the spread of COVID-19.

Implications of the material: Our research on tribal casino closures during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic demonstrates that tribal governments were more likely than state governments to prioritize public health over economic development.