During the 1970s, American Indians in California faced a disadvantage that included unemployment, poverty, unsanitary living conditions, deteriorating homes, and diseases such as diabetes, pneumonia and hepatitis. As a means of coping with the harsh life on the reservation, some tribes included gaming into their lifestyle. The idea behind including casinos on the reservation was to achieve some measure of economic self-sufficiency (Weeber 85). It is important to remember that there are many Native American tribes that do not cash in on casino profits, for moral or traditional reasons, or because they are in a bad area geographically (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 thrived from poverty because they adopted gaming as a form of economic growth. Next I will talk about the internal struggle, known as “disenrollment,” that affected the tribe before and after the adoption of the games. Finally, I will explain the tribe's power to cancel members, citing Martinez v. Santa Clara Pueblo, and I will 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), there were other Indian tribes gambling in California during the early 1980s. Some of these tribes, such as the Cabazon Band of Mission Indians, operated bingo and poker games on their reservations against state laws. The state of California decided to demonstrate its power to the Cabazon Band by using Public Law 280 (1953), which had granted state criminal jurisdiction over Indian reservations. ...... half of the paper ...... those who control the games could have their membership revoked (Weeber 91). The membership committee accused Gomez of falsifying federal and local records (Barker 167) then decided that Gomez should be removed from the band's membership roster (Barker 168). After being expelled from the Pechanga Band, Gomez filed a civil complaint in state court alleging that tribal officials were not following its constitution (Barker 147). The Pechanga Constitution created in 1978 only required that a person demonstrate "descent from the original Pechanga Temecula people", but this was changed in 1996 by the tribal council. The new regulation required that a person have an ancestor from a group of Temecula who had moved into the Pechanga Valley (Beiser 76). Tribal officials say the deletions were necessary to correct some long-standing errors in the membership roster (Weeber 91).