The Gamble of Legalized Gambling (Mar 2008)

“Show me the money” has become a catch phrase for rapacious greed in today’s society. Although the phrase was first uttered in the movie Jerry Maguire by Cuba Gooding Jr., it is Tom Cruise’s fanatical response to Gooding’s request that reverberates to this day. Nowhere can we see the intricate dynamics of what it truly means to showing the money more on display then when we look at our local lottery.

The lottery has tragically become the poor man’s hope beyond all hope; his lifeline at the end of the abyss beyond the American ideals of industry, invention, thrift and tenacity and even faith to pull himself out of the valley of debt and despair. It is the government’s proposed panacea for all his issues, the promised land of financial freedom that can only be reached if he picks the right numbers, at the right time, on the right day, and with the right wager. You have to be in it to win it. So if you are going to be in it, you may as well play big or go home.

It sounds archaic to say that gambling was once seen as one of the great sins this moral nation sought to protect its people from. Although lotteries were instrumental in the formative years of America and were used to build many of the earliest institutions of higher learning, they were abandoned in the early to mid 19^th century.  In their place illegal lotteries called running numbers by organized crime became the poor man’s opportunity to immediate short term instant wealth (or despair if he did not pay up if he lost) until the lottery was officially reintroduced to Americans in 1964 when New Hampshire authorized a lottery for Education.

Since 1964 forty two states have adopted laws to allow legalized gambling in the form of state sponsored lotteries, thus all but eliminating the illegal numbers racket by entrenching with the hand of the government a kinder, gentler racket. In urging passage, many states point to surrounding states that have the lottery bemoaning the fact that its residents are traveling just across the border to play and that state benefits from such expenditures, when we could keep that money here in state. This has become the equivalent of the maternal refrain “if everyone jumps off a bridge, will you jump too?” The anecdotal answer is apparently yes when it comes to the lottery.

Numerous political and appointed bureaucratic functionaries stipulate that legalized gambling, whether casinos, or other types of gambling, generate enough revenue to significantly enhance per pupil expenditures. (Stanley 2004). However to play the casinos or horse races one must usually travel to get to these locations. The working poor does not have that type of cash at immediate disposal whereas having a lottery means they can pick up tickets while in the course of their day at numerous outlets in their home town. Education is often used as a smokescreen for the politicians’ true purpose in proposing legislation in favor of lotteries gathering monies for other projects that people would not pay for through raise in taxes.  How can people vote against something as noble as education?  After all if you lose, the money is going to a great cause, namely education of our youth. The lottery according to Ronald Wilson “once almost universally rejected as ethically unacceptable, lotteries and other forms of state-supported gambling have become major sources of revenue for U.S.[S]tates reluctant to raise taxes;” (Wilson 2004 para 1) In following such a course of action“… the government essentially turns gambling into some sort of civic virtue, equating it with staying in school or abstaining from drugs.” (Hertzke 1998 pg 629)

With the media shamelessly trumpeting the creation of new jobs and endless dollars willingly donated by lottery players for politicians pet projects, the amount of loss has been devastatingly brutal, although not as publicized by the proponents of the lottery. Administrative costs and salaries often make up a sizeable portion of the proclaimed gains brought in by lottery sales. Monies that have been publicly announced to be allocated for the proclaimed purpose are often “borrowed” by politicians to pay for other projects, never to be repaid.  Hypocritical warnings about the dangers of gambling are absurd when placed in hard to read small print after an ad extolling the virtues of playing the lottery. Those who truly win are seldom well prepared to handle such windfall and usually fall prey to the snarling wolves knocking at their doors begging for a hand out in one form or the other. The psychological damage of perpetually losing is never seriously addressed by the government. These reasons make the lottery a gamble that is not worth the potential risks inherent in placing the first wager that it will pay off for the state.

Slick and colorful marketing of these legal games of chance are often intensified in the lower socioeconomic regions of every state in a never ending attempt to rob from the poor and give to the rich. Very rarely do the little bettors – the ones that are constantly paraded before the citizenry as responsible players-win. New games are quickly introduced whenever sales slump to entice discouraged players to try their luck once again.  In an ethical essay on the lottery, Richard Wilson writes:

“Lottery revenues are not guaranteed and may fall after the novelty interest in lotteries wears off or if excessive number of states begins to use lotteries. If the enlarged government’s programs become seen as entitlements, then those programs may be difficult to eliminate—or even trim—after lottery revenues subside. Taxes may then have to be raised to support the programs.” (Knox 2004 Vol 2 pg 867 para 9)

In North Carolina where I live the lottery brought in a reported $79 million dollars for the month of January alone, yet they just increased the Pick 3 drawing from once to twice a day. The payout for this game is minimal by lottery standards, (S500.00) but it brings in fifteen percent of the lottery income. This game in particular targets the poor of the state with a chance to win $500.00 at only fifty cents a chance, ironically the same cost of the daily newspaper.  In commenting on this shameful reach towards those least likely to be able to afford it long term, John Rustin of the North Carolina Family Council comments: “It’s kind of the continual progression of the lottery adding more ways for people to gamble in an attempt to separate the citizen’s of the state from their hard earned money” (Niolet and Qullin 2008 p16a )

Admittedly there will always be a perpetual need to generate revenue for local, state and federal governments. Not one citizen wants to pay more through taxes, even if they realize the need for additional tax revenue to fund necessary governmental initiatives. There are numerous well intended but inadequately financed projects that conspicuously clutter the legislative highways of numerous local and state governments. Roads and bridges are in desperate need of repair, public schools desperate for more space, more equipment and more staff seem to always top the immediate and most pressing needs lists when presenting the call for legalized gambling through a lottery. Without a lottery we are told that our schools will never be fixed, new modern schools can not be built, qualified teachers will bypass our state for neighboring states that have a lottery, our roads will remain in constant disrepair, and our bridges will collapse like a house of cards.

Particularly devious is the position of those politicians who support legalized gambling through the lottery, is the attachment of public education initiatives to the passing of lottery referendums. Promises of immediate, untaxed income for new schools, teacher pay raises, new equipment and more teachers are the seductively sweet inducements that have caused the public to incessantly rot its collective teeth. This then politically puts the voter with a moral compass in one of two untenable positions; pro lottery or anti education. Jonathon Bean and Donald Gribbin write: “In short you can become a millionaire AND help fund poor schools and underpaid teachers by playing the lottery. This being against the state lottery is like being against laws such as the “Pro Children Act.” (Bean and Gribbin, 2007 para 1)

Politicians love to conceal the greedy hand of government. The lottery is an ideal example. (Bean and Gribbin, 2007 para 10) This is a gamble that the people of this state should not longer allow the government of the state to make. The odds are overwhelming that the majority of those who play the lottery will not win enough to radically alter their lifestyle. Even with the advertised Multi million dollar payouts in the major games, it is but a drop in the proverbial bucket to what people put in for the chance to win that amount. The money generated for the noble purpose of education will not all reach it’s proclaimed beneficiaries as promised but will be diverted to some other immediate and pressing concern. Politicians will always find ways to keep the funds from reaching the source citing other concerns before the money is released. In effect the rich will keep getting richer, the poor will keep getting poorer and the children we are trying to help will suffer in ways not envisioned by lottery advocates.

You can bet on it.