SHARE THIS SHOW:
RELATED CONVERSATIONS:
RECENTLY ON TOL:
The TOL Blog
TAGS:
Lottery Profits
Profits from the Oregon Lottery pay for important things like schools, parks and salmon restoration, to name a few. And they are also increasingly important to bar and tavern owners, many of whom are struggling to survive a statewide smoking ban and the ongoing recession.
Those contracts with bars and retailers are up for renewal, and the Oregon Lottery Commission will be voting on Friday on Director Dale Penn's recommendations to protect those profits from immediate cuts.
Advocacy groups like Stand for Children of Oregon have been vociferous in advocating that more lottery profits are needed for schools and that retailers could stand a cut and still get a "reasonable rate of return," as specified in the Oregon Constitution.
We'll also check in on what's before Washington voters in next week's election and the race for Vancouver mayor — the closest in recent memory. In addition, voters in Washington will decide a referendum on a domestic partner law and a property tax limitation proposal by anti-tax activist Tim Eyman.
What are you paying the most attention to on the Washington ballot?
Are you a bar or tavern owner? How much do you depend on profits from video poker games? Do you have kids in school? How much lottery money do you think should be coming your way? What's the right balance to strike between retailer profits and state services?
GUESTS:
- Austin Jenkins: Olympia correspondent for OPB News
- John Laird: Editorial page editor at the Columbian Newspaper
- Holly Pruett: Executive director of Stand for Children
- Seth Leavens: Co-owner of The Belmont Inn and The Space Room in Portland
- Bob Whelan: Senior economist at ECONorthwest
Tagged as: education · gambling · lottery
Photo credit: modulate / Creative Commons
-
"Why don't we just accept that public education is the foundation of an equitable and democratic society and just fund it instead of playing stupid games like lottery funding?"
"The lottery is just a despicable, deceptive, and regressive form of taxation."
Hear hear!
You have better words than I do about this.
-
I agree with the fact that society needs to accept education funding as something required to keep the united states competitive on the global stage. One of the problems I have with funding the education is though, is that it is fairly broken and uneffective. Why would I want to pay for a service that isn't teaching the kids in our country in an effective way?
Not to mention the waste and unfairness that goes on in the education system. Things like pointless standardized testing that takes away from learning, doesn't prove what kids have learned, and waste taxpayers dollars to do all that. What about rural schools or schools outside of portland getting more money than schools in portland? My highschool, Benson Polytechnic in the heart of portland, was falling apart at the seams. Yet you go out to a school in beaverton, corvallis, etc. and their schools are all brand new, new computers, plenty of textbooks, adequite class size. Why do portlanders get the crappy end of the stick?
-
@oregoncurtis
How can you agree that funding education something required to keep the United States competitive on the global stage, but not want to fund it because it is broken?
Funding and effectiveness are separate issues. And, I would argue, that the problems you describe, standardized testing for instance, are a symptom of our total unwillingness to prioritize education and educators trying to work within the horribly limited budget we give them.
Not to mention schools have to contend with governors, legislatures, and citizens that look upon public schools with contempt at their very existence. I'm pretty sure the decisions former Florida governor Jeb Bush made were designed from the start to marginalize public schools in favor of private schools. And, a scary number of people in Florida believe wholeheartedly that they have no responsibility to fund public schools.
It's true that just throwing money at schools will not fix them. Our attitudes have to change in order to make schools better. However, once our attitudes change, schools are still going to need money.
-
The money Oregon’s schools will receive from the lottery if commission rates are lowered will not solve our school funding problem. But revenue is revenue, and when this money could bring back laid off teachers, keep our kids in school longer, and ultimately help Oregon children keep up with their national and international peers, we must look to every possible new revenue source. The primary purpose of the Lottery is to provide funding for public services and public education. The Lottery Commission has a constitutional mandate to maximize the revenue generated from the lottery for the public good. Lowering retailers’ commission to 16% provides Oregon schools with an extra $56 million. This is hardly a solution when you look at further cuts of at least $733 million over the next biennium, but it will help.
It is true that all Oregonians, including hard-working lottery retailers and tavern owners, have been affected by the recession. Stand for Children’s proposal to lower lottery commission rates and use the money to help ease painful budget cuts for schools is reasonable and fair. Additionally, the Lottery’s own studies show that 15% will turn adequate profit for retailers.
It’s clear that increasing the amount of lottery dollars for schools will not create a long-term, shared, strategic solution to end Oregon’s school funding boom and bust cycle. However, the children of today should not suffer because we have not yet found this solution. As we weather the current financial crisis we must seize concrete opportunities now to prepare all kids for a better future.
-
Rorybowman: sorry for the gender misidentification! Names are hard sometimes!
-
No problem, whatsoever! Lots of folks got quite a laugh, and even asked me what I was hiding beneath my beard... 8^)
Thanks for a great show, as per usual.
-
I'm a social worker, and have seen several people's lives devastated by video poker. I think the wider social impacts should also be a part of the conversation.
-
Of course the lottery is wicked, but (I guess) I would rather some of the gambling contingents' money goes to something allegedly useful. Isn't this the American way: the lesser of two evils? What a tepid society we have created!
The real problem with the lottery is that it exists at all, in a state where gambling is largely illegal. Allowing a lottery sets an awkward, hypocritical and ridiculous example. I didn't realize the state was licensed as a Robin Hood. It is a terrible joke and it is certainly on us.
-
You can read about Stand for Children's proposal to lower rates over the next six years here: http://www.stand.org/Page.aspx?pid=1972 The plan doesn't make any changes to the commission rates for 18 months - allowing retailers to recover from any profits lost during the recession.
People will always go to bars, and people are not going to stop playing the lottery. If the Lottery Commission has a constitutional mandate to maximize revenue for the public good, why are we even having this debate? Right now this revenue is not being maximized for the public good.
Ask yourself this - how much does it really cost retailers to house lottery machines? And then ask yourself, how much does it cost us to have to take care of a society full of more and more high school dropouts every year? When will we ever learn and prioritize the things that are important, like high quality schools for Oregon kids?
-
Grocery stores have traditionally had a two to three percent profit margin because most groceries are a commodity. I suggest that profit margin is also appropriate for the lottery managers. Turn the rest over to the schools and teach kids not to gamble away their hard earned paychecks.
-
The bar-owner guest is very evasive with his answers. Bars and restaurants are making very good money for basically renting out space for lottery machines. If it wasn't profitable, these establishments would just no longer have the machines in their space. I do not believe the lottery commission was established to keep bars and restaurants in business. Originally state-sponsored gambling was only passed by the voters because the money was supposed to go to education. Now it is syphened off to many other causes, parks, salmon rehabilitation, and keeping bars and restaurants profitible. I believe we should return to the basics, the lottery money should be used for funding education, as it was intended.
-
If the business is dependent on lottery income to stay open aren't they in violation of the way the lottery revenue is structured. I recall a business being investigated for being too dependent on lottery income.
-
I have several friends who play video slots on an average of five times a week. None of them have very much discretionary income to begin with, and as the odds are stacked against their winning more often than loosing, it can be assumed that they are spending money in a way they shouldn’t due to the addictive nature of the games.
Isn’t this system of state sanctioned gambling just facilitating a redistribute a certain demographics wealth (often the poor) towards the benefit of other demographics.
Cameron
Salem, Or
-
Great. So the lottery not only props up education but it also allows the lame bars of Oregon to thrive. It seems really odd that in this state, one that is largely liberal, we allow this lottery system. Because, the lottery is really a tax on mainly the poor. Maybe we can use lottery money to fund healthcare too? Considering Mr. Obama can't accomplish public healthcare in any meaningful way.
-
Why is the state in the gambling business?
If we want to fund schools we should do so with taxes. The idea that we are creating jobs with non-destination gambling is absurd, as any revenue generated by gambling is money that could be spent elsewhere in the community on products that do not have a negative impact on the individual and the community.
I suggest you consider the ideas of UNLV Professor William N. Thompson, also my uncle, who has advocated that only those who live a certain distance from casinos, should be allowed to enter. Otherwise, you are providing no net benefit to your community.
-
It really is telling isn't it, that Oregonians are willing to take a gamble on educating the children of Oregon?
Do we really put such a low priority on education that we put it at such risk? That we bet our childrens education on the roll of video dice?
-
Comments are now closed.
How about not funding schools with the lottery? Florida, for instance, sold the lottery as extra money for education. Instead, the lottery replaced normal funding and lottery revenues have decreased. At the same time, Florida has decreased normal education funding.
And now, here in Oregon, we are actually having a conversation about whether schools or bars should get Oregon lottery profits? Really? Seriously?
Thomas Jefferson would burn this country to the ground if he were around to see what the states were doing with education funding.
Why don't we just accept that public education is the foundation of an equitable and democratic society and just fund it instead of playing stupid games like lottery funding?
The lottery is just a despicable, deceptive, and regressive form of taxation.