Feeling better about the state's numbers racket
Pondering this quote in Mark's lottery story today:
"It does make me feel a little bit better knowing that the decision we made has helped the lottery from a player perspective and in turn helped our revenues," said Rep. Maggie Jeffus, a Greensboro Democrat and House budget writer.
I'm afraid Rep. Jeffus is entertaining contradictory thoughts.
The legislature, with her support, OK'd an increase in payouts for some lottery games. The idea was to entice more people to play and increase lottery revenues. The scheme worked.
The bottom line, as she noted, is that the change "helped our revenues." That means more money was transferred from individuals to the state. Which also means, from a "player perspective," that the change was a loser. The people risked more and, in total, lost more.
Should that really make Rep. Jeffus "feel a little bit better"?
Particularly when studies consistently show that the poor play more?
Mark also notes that the lottery commission wants to look into appealing to Hispanics, who apparently aren't contributing their fair share to lottery revenues.
Solution: Spanish-language advertising.
Problem: The lottery law says, "No advertising may intentionally target specific groups or economic classes."
So, the lottery people have to figure out how to intentionally target a specific group (Hispanics) without violating the law.
I hope, when they run their first Spanish-language ad, Hispanic advocacy groups will complain to the attorney general, and I hope he will nail the lottery commission the way he nailed gas price-gougers, who, ethically, are exactly on the same plane.
What I actually expect to happen is for the legislature to help out again and change the law so that the lottery commission can advertise any way it wants. Its ads already are designed to entice people to play, naturally, which believe it or not the law also prohibits.
This problem is a little thornier because it's obviously more exploitative to target Hispanics, but if doing so promises to bring in more money I have no doubt that compliant legislators will manage to feel better about it.
Comments (3)
To report abuse of the comment feature on this site, please use the feedback form at the bottom of any page.
Doug,
You should come to one of the lottery commission meetings to hear what is really being said instead of misinforming the public. That might make you feel a little better.
Tom
Posted on December 8, 2008 9:31 AM
Tom,
I strongly opposed the creation of a lottery in North Carolina, which I consider poor public policy and an inappropriate function of government. I opposed the manner in which the lottery law was approved in North Carolina. I continue to oppose the lottery and certainly its advertising. The ABC commission doesn't run glitzy TV ads enticing people to buy liquor, and I don't think the lottery commission should run glitzy TV ads enticing people to buy lottery tickets.
That's where I stand, and I don't expect to change my mind or feel better about it.
Posted on December 8, 2008 10:24 AM
Tom Shaheen just called, and we had a pleasant conversation. As I wrote in a column a couple of years ago, he really is a nice guy, and I believe his goal is to bring in money to support education in North Carolina. We're just not going to agree on the basics here.
Posted on December 8, 2008 10:36 AM