Sunday, October 07, 2007

What Would Shirley Jackson Say?

Today's NYT has an interesting and thoroughly researched article about state-run lotteries.

You might recall how many of these programs were originally pitched: proceeds were to go to schools. As is all too often the case when the private sector, the government, and big money are tangled, the results are a little less than the promise:

... among the states that earmark lottery money for education, lottery dollars accounted for 1 percent or less of the total K-12 education financing (including all state, federal and local revenue) last year in at least five states, including New Jersey. New York had the highest percentage, 5.3 percent.

Now, it's not all bad. Percentages can be misleading. The raw numbers:

State lotteries raised more than $56 billion and returned $17 billion to the state governments last year.

It's hard to say, given the current political climate, if $17 billion could have been raised through taxes. On the other hand, it's also hard to say how much of existing tax revenue originally earmarked for schools was spent in other ways, since the state governments had this new source of revenue. Certainly, I remember Pete Wilson playing games like this when he was governor of California. The NYT piece has other examples.

There's also the consideration of the morality of the whole thing. According to the sidebar to the story:

Massachusetts has the highest lottery spending per resident, at $699 … 

The libertarian in me says, whatever. Let adults make their own choices. For a lot of people, a few bucks here and there buys, if nothing else, a chance to dream for a little while.

The liberal in me recalls Mario Cuomo, who once characterized supporters of lotteries as cowardly politicians balancing the budget on the backs of poor people. Seven hundred bucks a year is a non-trivial amount of money to spend, especially when the chances are good that the big spenders have no grasp of the odds.

I guess if I were king, I'd permit the lotteries to remain. But I'd require that part of the proceeds pay for a required one-semester course in high school on probability and statistics.


(Post title explained)

4 comments:

Anonymous said...

I love lotteries. Where else for a dollar can you indulge in a great fantasy?

Anonymous said...

Brendan for King!

bjkeefe said...

Clare --

Agreed. As I said in the original post:

For a lot of people, a few bucks here and there buys, if nothing else, a chance to dream for a little while.

But your dollar every now and again is not $700/year.

bjkeefe said...

TC:

Brendan for King!

Thanks. I'm not sure you get to vote on this one. You can help with the coup d'etat, though, if you like. Bring your pitchfork and torch to the secret meeting place. You know when.

ShareThis