RSN August 14 Fundraising
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment
Print

Garofalo reports: "The National Gambling Impact Study Commission has found that 'there is reason to doubt if earmarked lottery revenues in fact have the effect of increasing funds available for the specified purpose.' The Nelson A. Rockefeller Institute of Government also found that 'new gambling operations that are intended to pay for normal increases in general state spending may add to, rather than ease, state budget imbalances.'"

A woman holds cash and lottery tickets while standing in line to play the lottery at a news stand in Los Angeles. (photo: Mario Anzuoni/Reuters)
A woman holds cash and lottery tickets while standing in line to play the lottery at a news stand in Los Angeles. (photo: Mario Anzuoni/Reuters)



Why Lotteries Are a Bad Bet for State Budgets

By Pat Garofalo, ThinkProgress

01 April 12

 

he jackpot for the upcoming Mega Millions lottery drawing has grown to a whopping $640 million. This sky-high total has some state legislators hoping for a big payday via the tax bill that would come from one of their residents taking home the prize. "I'd love it if a Rhode Islander wins," said Rep. Helio Melo, the chairman of his state House's Finance Committee.

If a Rhode Islander were lucky enough to win, the state's take would be more than $20 million. But the fact that state legislators are giddy at the prospect of a lottery-financed tax windfall merely shows how foolhardy it is that states depend on lottery revenue at all. As Elizabeth Winslow McAuliffe pointed out in Public Integrity, "while lotteries were initially perceived as fiscal saviors, they have not generated the anticipated revenue." Many states earmark their lottery revenue for a specific purpose, most often education, but it turns out that that formula isn't workable:

The educational "bonus" appears to be nonexistent. Miller and Pierce (1997) studied the short- and long-term effect of education lotteries. They found that lottery states did indeed increase per-capita spending on education during the lottery's early years. However, after some time these states actually decreased their overall spending on education. In contrast, states without lotteries increased education spending over time. In fact, nonlottery states spend, on average, 10 percent more of their budgets on education than lottery states. (Gearey 1997).

The National Gambling Impact Study Commission has found that "there is reason to doubt if earmarked lottery revenues in fact have the effect of increasing funds available for the specified purpose." The Nelson A. Rockefeller Institute of Government also found that "new gambling operations that are intended to pay for normal increases in general state spending may add to, rather than ease, state budget imbalances."

As Citizens for Tax Justice put it, "it becomes a case of diminishing returns as neighboring states introduce new and better lotto games. Then, states either lose business to another state or hit a ceiling for how many lotto tickets a population can buy. That is, as a revenue source, it's a short or medium term quick fix but not a long term solution."

And then there's the simple fact that the lottery is, in essence, a regressive tax, with about a 38 percent tax rate (a rate usually reserved for the very richest Americans). According to the Bloomberg News "Sucker Index," residents of Georgia are doing the most damage to their own finances through the lottery, followed by residents of Massachusetts.

 

Comments   

We are concerned about a recent drift towards vitriol in the RSN Reader comments section. There is a fine line between moderation and censorship. No one likes a harsh or confrontational forum atmosphere. At the same time everyone wants to be able to express themselves freely. We'll start by encouraging good judgment. If that doesn't work we'll have to ramp up the moderation.

General guidelines: Avoid personal attacks on other forum members; Avoid remarks that are ethnically derogatory; Do not advocate violence, or any illegal activity.

Remember that making the world better begins with responsible action.

- The RSN Team

 
+5 # John Whiting 2012-04-02 02:59
Dr Johnson's definition of a lottery was definitive: a device by which the poor were made to tax themselves.
 
 
+3 # jimyoung 2012-04-02 08:45
That is so much more polite than what some called it "A tax on the stupid" when they started the California Lottery. We claim to use it for education, but are now finding the bitter end of that path they led us down.

An excellent presentation on a less personal version, "a tax on stupidity", is at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lottery
 
 
+2 # Texan 4 Peace 2012-04-02 09:22
Lottery: A tax on people who can't do math.
 
 
+5 # reiverpacific 2012-04-02 10:44
My main problem with the Powerball and Mega-Millions is that it's a "Winner take all" situation like the national mentality set by the already rich. Wouldn't these huge prizes, as they grow, be split up into several upper branches like the shape of a spreading tree, so that more players have a chance to win smaller but still generous prizes and the revenue is dispersed to different state or national coffers?
I know that there are sometimes multiple winners of the "Big One" with the right numbers but to my socialistic mind, it's a bit too greed-focussed, targeting the really desperate who can least afford the outlay for tickets but who seem to play more than those with decent incomes (becoming rarer in these times).
Just a thought from outside the box.
 

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.

RSNRSN