By Rev. Mark H. Creech

Mark Erwin’s “Bring lottery dollars back to N.C. schools” (Viewpoint, June 19) reminds me of the old saying, ‘There’s nothing wrong with making a mistake, just don’t respond with an encore.” Never has an argument for a state-operated lottery and its so-called benefits for education been more mistaken.

Do state-operated lotteries help education? Hardly! Two professors at St. Mary’s College, Notre Dame, conducted extensive analyses on states with “education lotteries” and published their findings in the Winter 1997 edition of the State and Local Government Review, a scholarly publication of the University of Georgia. Their conclusion: “Lotteries are false promises for education. In fact, states are likely to decrease their rate of spending for education upon operating lotteries designated for that purpose. Regardless of when or where the lottery operated, education spending declined once a state put a lottery into effect. This study indicates that states without lotteries actually maintain and increase their education spending more so than states with lotteries.”

A 1996 article by Money Magazine said, “Lottery states spend less of their budgets on education than states without lotteries, about 50 percent for lottery states and 60 percent for non-lottery states. Often the states earmarked less of their general fund for education as lottery funds were contributed.”

In other words, lotteries have actually undermined support for education across the country.

Erwin suggests that a state-operated lottery in North Carolina would generate anywhere from $427 million to $676 million for education. This is an overly optimistic projection. But let’s say we could expect to gain around $500 million. That would mean our state would have to sell at least $1.5 billion in lottery tickets annually. To do that, every N.C. household would have to buy $450 worth of lottery tickets every year.

Studies show that about half the state’s population will play the lottery. This means that the half that play will have to spend nearly $1,000 a year on the lottery in order to net $500 million for education. Not very likely, is it? The N.C. General Assembly fiscal staff, an impartial observer, estimates the gain to be $300 million to $325 million, a far cry from Erwin’s estimate.

Erwin laments that N.C. students are “forced to learn in trailers with inadequate technology.” However, Gov. Easley isn’t proposing that we use the proceeds of a lottery for classrooms or technology. In fact, his budget proposes to use 80 percent of the lottery for General Fund purposes.

Erwin is terribly mistaken to suggest that it is a “misconception that lotteries prey on the poor.” While he relies on a study by the California Lottery Commission, hardly an impartial observer, the National Gambling Impact Study Commission says “the data suggests that lottery play is heaviest among economically disadvantaged populations.”

The NGISC was commissioned by Congress to conduct a comprehensive legal and factual study of the social and economic implications of gambling in the United States. Duke professors Charles Clotfelter and Philip Cook found that individuals earning less than $10,000 per year spend more money on lotteries than any other group.

A state-sponsored lottery works like Robin Hood in reverse, seducing scarce resources from the poor and bestowing them on the middle and upper classes. Sales of Georgia Lottery tickets are 2 1/2 times higher in poor neighborhoods than affluent ones, while recipients of lottery-funded scholarships have family incomes $13,000 higher than the state average.

This is no coincidence. Lotteries intentionally saturate impoverished neighborhoods with outlets. They know exactly where their most loyal and desperate customers are.

As Erwin says, ‘”The facts speak for themselves.” But they don’t indicate that passing a lottery is “responsible economics” or “common sense.” They indicate just the opposite.

The Rev. Mark H. Creech is executive director of the Raleigh-based Christian Action League of North Carolina, Inc.

Charlotte Observer, 6/25/2002