During the 1970s, California's American Indians faced disadvantages, including unemployment, poverty, unsanitary living conditions, deteriorating homes and to diseases such as diabetes, pneumonia and hepatitis. In order to cope with the harsh life on the reservation, some tribes included gambling in their way of life. The idea behind incorporating casinos into the reservation was to achieve some measure of economic self-sufficiency (Weeber 85). It is important to mention that many Native American tribes do not take advantage of casino profits, for moral or traditional reasons, or because they are geographically in the wrong area (Canby 332). Some of these tribes are still without electricity, water, paved roads, and medical facilities, among other necessities (Barker 155). In this article, I will show how the Pechanga tribe managed to rise out of poverty because they embraced gaming as a form of economic growth. Next, I'll talk about the internal struggle, known as "opt-out," that affected the tribe before and after video game adoption. Finally, I will explain the tribe's power to disenroll members, citing Martinez v. Santa Clara Pueblo, and show how they continue to use the ruling today. Before the Pechanga Band of Luiseno Indians, in Riverside, California, could begin gambling operations (Barker 165), other Indian tribes took up gambling in California in the early 1980s. Some of these tribes, like the Cabazon Band of Mission Indians, held bingo and poker games on their reservation, in violation of state laws. The State of California decided to show its power to the Cabazon Band using Public Law 280 (1953), which had granted it criminal jurisdiction over Indian reservations. ...... middle of paper ...... people controlling the games can have their membership revoked (Weeber 91). The registration committee accused Gomez of falsifying federal and local records (Barker 167), then decided that Gomez should be removed from the band's registration book (Barker 168). After Gomez was removed from the Pechanga Band, he filed a civil suit in state court, alleging that tribal officials had failed to follow the constitution (Barker 147). The Pechanga Constitution created in 1978 only required that a person prove "descent from the original people of Pechanga Temecula," but this was changed in 1996 by the tribal council. The new settlement required that a person have an ancestor from a group of people from Temeculas who had moved to the Pechanga Valley (Beiser 76). Tribal officials say the delistings were necessary to correct some long-standing errors in the membership roll (Weeber 91).