The follies of the so-called education lottery
Published March 12, 2016
by Chris Fitzsimon, NC Policy Watch and NC SPIN panelist, March 11, 2016.
Here we go again.
The folks running the state lottery want everybody to know that they can sell more tickets and rake in millions of more dollars from the poorest areas of the state if they can spend more money trying to convince people to play and if they are allowed to sell tickets online and on smart phones.
And of course they’d love the chance to put video lottery terminals everywhere too.
Lottery officials made the presentation at a legislative oversight committee meeting where they were asked to talk about ways to raise more revenue for the state—and they have a lot of them.
Judging from a WRAL-TV report, there did appear to be a few sane voices in the room. Rep. Pat Hurley wanted to know if all the new games and ramped up advertising would put a strain on the social services budget, as the lottery preys on folks already struggling to make ends meet.
Lottery Director Alice Garland replied that the lottery funds programs to help people with gambling problems. Of course, the people have to call in to get assistance and that’s mostly for people with a gambling addiction not people who are living on the edge and buying lottery tickets out of desperation after being inundated with all the ads talking about their chances to win millions of dollars.
It’s worth noting that North Carolina ranks last in the country in the percentage of laid off workers who receive unemployment insurance but no worry, they can buy lottery tickets and turn their lives around.
House Speaker Pro Tem Paul Stam, who isn’t right about much, is right about the lottery and pointed out that lottery ads are about enticing people to play, which is technically a violation of the state laws that govern the lottery.
Garland said her staff looks closely at ads to see if they induce people to play.
Of course the ads are enticing people. That’s what commercials are designed to do.
Rep. Nelson Dollar wondered what the difference was between the lottery operating video terminals and private video poker or video sweepstakes machines, which the General Assembly has outlawed.
Garland told the committee that there were big differences, most notably state regulation and then added that “there’s security, there’s integrity, there’s reporting and there’s responsible gaming.”
Integrity and responsible are two words not generally associated with a strategy where funding for education programs depends on how many people the state can convince to throw its money away on a one in ten million chance of striking it rich.
And while there’s some reporting of the numbers, there has never been a demographic analysis of who plays the lottery in North Carolina. Lottery officials don’t keep the data. They apparently don’t want to know.
Studies elsewhere have shown that low-income people are more likely to buy lottery tickets and spend a higher share of their income on the games that middle class and wealthy people.
That is supported by the county sales information that is available. A report by NC Policy Watch two years ago found that the ten counties with the highest lottery ticket sales per capita were clustered in low-income areas in the eastern part of the state.
The top counties in per capita sales all had poverty rates of more than 20 percent at the time. In Halifax County where the poverty rate was pushing 30 percent, residents were spending almost $600 a year.
That doesn’t sound much like responsible gaming, but the lottery’s success depends on folks in low-income areas buying lots of tickets. And just wait until folks there can play on their phones or on a terminal at the local convenience store when they are buying bread or milk.
And remember this is your state government making this happen.
Integrity is definitely not the word that comes to mind.
http://www.ncpolicywatch.com/2016/03/11/the-follies-of-the-so-called-education-lottery/
March 13, 2016 at 11:42 am
Norm Kelly says:
Fact: government despises competition. Government eliminates competition whenever competition is found. Government will NOT allow competition to exist.
What's the difference between government and 'the mob'? Government uses 'laws' and the power of government monopoly to eliminate competition. 'The mob' uses murder and intimidation to eliminate competition. The result is the same.
'Garland told the committee that there were big differences, most notably state regulation'. What an absolutely STOOPID comment! Must come from a government lifer with the philosophy that government is the be-all-end-all, most efficient, best advocate for 'the people'! What's the difference between a private business that has to deal with state regulation and a state agency that deals with IT'S OWN REGULATION? First, the private business is CONTROLLED by government and MUST face the full power of government if they choose to violate regulations. Second, when government regulates itself it is EXACTLY the hens regulating the hen-house. Self-regulation with government monopoly in place is WORSE than 'the mob'.
Can government NOT be in a business but simply regulate a private business? Yes, and it's considerably more efficient. Unless you accept the 'big government' idea that stealing $1 from the private sector to be GIVEN to the public sector actually generates $2.50 in economic activity!
The NC ABC system is a perfect example of how WRONG it is for government to be in business. There remains NO LOGICAL explanation for the state being in this business. It is far more efficient for alcohol to be sold by private business. Of course, that prior statement has built in a belief that NC ABC has any level of efficiency in it. There is NONE. It would be far more profitable, and efficient, if the state would simply sell every ABC store to a private business and simply regulate and collect taxes.
Just like the lottery. The government eliminated competition from the private sector instead of simply regulating it. The reason? Gambling is bad for people. Unless, of course, the gambling is owned by the government. Then, since it's 'for the children' suddenly gambling becomes a good thing! Talk about confused! Not even close to 'thinking' or logic.
'Integrity is definitely not the word that comes to mind.' Let's remember, it's election time. All the bad press that's coming from libs about the Republicans in the legislature is coming from a biased group of people. It was the DEMON PARTY that forced state-sponsored gambling upon us. Where were their allies in the media? Did Chris write any editorials about the disaster that would be coming if the demons passed the lottery? And, since it is election time, let's also remember that it was the demon party in control of the legislature when the Duke coal ash pond disaster was created. The N&D let it slip once, and only once, that demon regulators and legislators knew FOR DECADES that the coal ash ponds were leaking. Regulators did nothing to stop it! Regulators did nothing to prevent the coming disaster.
So when you vote this month, remember how POORLY the demon party looks out for you or cares for you. They want your money and your loyalty. And they want to trap your kids in the public school government monopoly system. And they obviously want to kill private sector competition. Plus it was demons who decided to borrow $2billion from central planners WITH NO repayment plan. And it was demons who forced the lottery on us, knowing full well that it was a major hit to the group of people they constantly tell us they work for! Demons knew before they passed gambling that it hit their target group of 'the poor' the hardest, yet they implemented it anyway. So the next time some lib whines at you about eliminating the income tax in favor of a sales tax, point out to that whiny lib that it was them who forced state-sponsored gambling upon the same group that they claim to protect by relying on the sales tax. Sometimes targeting 'the poor' is good for demons and they promote it. Sometimes targeting 'the poor' is bad for demons and they oppose it. Depends on how well it benefits demon pols as to how they respond to any proposal. If it's a 'scheme', they probably support it. If it's and 'idea' they probably oppose it.
