Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) is refereeing a vicious fight in her caucus over an expansion of Indian gambling in Michigan that is pitting Reps. John Dingell (D-Mich.) and Nick Rahall (D-W.Va.) against members of the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC).

Both sides in the fight have traded charges of double-dealing and corruption akin to the Jack Abramoff Indian gambling scandals that helped hand Democrats the majority a little more than a year ago.

Dingell, a Democratic Party elder statesman and chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee, and Reps. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.) and Candice Miller (R-Mich.) are pushing hard for the two proposed off-reservation casinos. They argue the areas are economically depressed and desperately need the jobs and revenue the casinos would bring.

But Rep. Carolyn Kilpatrick, a Democrat who represents Detroit and chairs the CBC, is vehemently opposed to the casinos and at least one of their proposed locations, near the Detroit airport.

Kilpatrick is deeply concerned that the Indian casinos would create unfair competition to three existing casinos in Detroit, which provided a crucial influx of $1.3 billion in revenue to the city in 2007. The Detroit casinos are helping the city battle its own economic woes, argued Kilpatrick and her son, Detroit Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick.

Emotions over the issue can be raw. Last year, Carolyn Kilpatrick was furious after Rahall, who is supporting Dingell on the legislation, scheduled a markup on the bill just as Congress was trying to leave town for the winter recess.

Rahall failed to have a hearing on the matter or alert committee members and staffers that the legislation had gambling implications. Instead, he referred to the measures as land claims settlement bills, according to a Democratic staff memo about the markup dated Nov. 13.

When Kilpatrick discovered the gambling implications, she took quick action. According to two Democratic sources, she approached Pelosi on the House floor and told her that unless she stopped the bill from moving without a hearing being held, Pelosi would lose her support for a Democratic leadership bill aimed at ending the war. At the time, Pelosi needed the support of the caucus’s more liberal members, many in the CBC, who were threatening to sit out the vote because they didn’t believe it went far enough.

Kilpatrick said she was concerned about an attempt to attach it to a bill on the House floor without a hearing or a mark-up first. She said she and Rep. Shelley Berkley (D-Nev.), who is concerned about possible implications for Nevada’s gaming industry, talked to Rahall and Pelosi and they agreed to hold a hearing in early 2008.

When asked specifically in an interview with The Hill this week whether Kilpatrick had threatened to yank her support for a Democratic Iraq bill, Kilpatrick refused to respond .