N.C. Lottery Foes Make for Unlikely Team

Although lottery supporters often group the opposition as ultra-religious Bible-beaters, those against a lottery span a broad ideological spectrum.

No matter what your political affiliation or ideology, they're sure to have an argument that appeals to you.

All of their arguments appeal to me.

Former UNC-system President Bill Friday is one of the leaders of the anti-lottery movement and himself engaged in a bipartisan effort. A member of the Democratic Party, Friday has formed an alliance with former GOP gubernatorial candidate Chuck Neely to oppose the potential state lottery.

No one denies that a quality education for North Carolina's schoolchildren is an important goal. Lotteries are simply poor public policy, from fiscal reasons to social ones.

Analysis from The John Locke Foundation, a conservative/libertarian think tank, shows a lottery would generate much less revenue than Gov. Mike Easley claims.

John Locke Vice President for Research Roy Cordato said for the lottery to gross the kind of money Easley claims, half of the households in North Carolina (a high proportion) would have to play the lottery and spend $870 each year.

Depending on the cost of a lottery ticket, that could potentially amount to buying one or more tickets each day for a year.

It's highly improbable that would happen, at least after the lottery's thrill is gone.

Chris Fitzsimon, executive director of the Common Sense Foundation, a liberal think tank, agreed that the governor's predictions are unreasonable.

"There's not a billion dollars that people have stuck in their mattresses that they're waiting to spend on the lottery," he said.

Liberal lottery opponents cite studies showing that those most likely to play the lottery are low-income residents in poor neighborhoods.

Cordato also said he agrees with this assessment of the lottery, although it's not his greatest concern.

A 1999 study by the National Gambling Impact Study Commission showed that people making less than $10,000 each year spend twice as much money on the lottery as those making more than $100,000.

In relative terms, the wealthier person spends only one-twentieth the amount of his income that the poorer person spends.

And because the poor are the big spenders, government targets advertisements toward those most desperate to get rich quick, even though their chances of winning are one in millions.

"The lottery would put the state in the position of encouraging, in fact, misleading people into misusing their money for a chance that's one in 10 million," Fitzsimon said.

Increased funding for education seems like a political inevitability, but Fitzsimon and Friday are counting on public discussions of the lottery policy itself to inform voters and their representatives of a lottery's pitfalls.

"Ultimately, when the debate is on the actual policy of the lottery and not what you're going to spend it on, I think it's an easy decision that the lottery is the wrong way to go," Fitzsimon said.

And lottery critics from every ideology agree that a state lottery is the easy way out for lawmakers who don't want to explicitly raise taxes or reallocate funding from other areas.

The diversity of opposition to a lottery gives credibility to the effort. The opposition movement cannot be pigeonholed as liberal or conservative, cold-hearted or paternal.

The movement is logical, practical and in support of sound public policy. Its spokesmen have loud voices that should break through the emotionalism and desperation portrayed by lottery supporters and should appeal to N.C. residents' rationality that a lottery is the wrong choice for this state.

Columnist Anne Fawcett can be reached at fawcetta@hotmail.com.