<< Back

5/29/02

Lottery looms as early issue in legislature
Gov. Easley’s inclusion of $250 million in budget forces legislature’s hand

By Scott McLeod
The lottery issue may come to a head in the upcoming short session of the General Assembly.

Gov. Mike Easley has included $250 million in revenues from a lottery in his proposed budget, and some legislative leaders have voiced their support for perhaps letting the issue come to a vote. North Carolina is facing a $2 billion shortfall as the legislature convenes this week, and Easley said lawmakers must come up with their own way to balance the budget if they are not going to support a lottery.

Both houses of the N.C. Legislature are controlled by Democrats, although the majority in the N.C. House is a narrow 62-58 margin. In the Senate the Democrats hold a commanding 35-15 edge. Democrats have traditionally shown more support for a lottery than Republicans.

Although polls have shown that a majority of North Carolina’s citizens support a lottery, the General Assembly has never pushed the issue. Powerful groups and individuals oppose it despite the fact that South Carolina, Georgia and Virginia all have lotteries and all garner a lot of money from North Carolina citizens.

Sen. Marc Basnight, the president pro tem of the Senate, told the Raleigh News and Observer that it’s time the issue was decided.

“People want the lottery, the majority of the people. I think it’s time we settled the issue now,” said Basnight.

The two senators from the western part of the North Carolina have different views on the lottery.

Sen. Bob Carpenter (R-Franklin) says it is a regressive tax that he would never support. Sen. Dan Robinson (D-Cullowhee) would vote against a straight up lottery vote, but he would approve putting the measure before voters for a non-binding referendum.

The Senate passed lottery referendum bills in 1989, 1991 and 1993.

In the House, Speaker Jim Black (D-Mecklenburg) wants to find out early in the session if there is support for voting on a lottery bill.

“I really prefer to deal with the lottery first. We need to know if that money is going to be there. Like the governor says, if you don’t want to do that, what do you want to do?” Black told reporters last week.

In WNC, Rep. Phil Haire holds a similar view to that of Robinson. He expressed support for a non-binding referendum but thinks a straight up-and-down vote is unlikely. Rep. Marge Carpenter (R-Waynesville) would not vote for a lottery in any form.

Haire said if a lottery is taken out of the equation early, lawmakers will have their work cut out for them.

“We’ve cut over a billion and a half dollars a year from our revenue stream, and we’ve cut the sales tax on food. We are at the first period of negative growth in decades. Some really serious measures are going to have to be taken,” said Haire.

The short legislative session that got underway May 28 is usually just suppose to include a budget tweaking. However, many lawmakers fear this session may linger as the fiscal crisis deepens.

While Easley favors a lottery, even a referendum would have to be non-binding. That’s because the N.C. Constitution bars referendums on issues that deal with spending money. It would, however, provide lawmakers with the kind of public input that would make passing a lottery easier.

A powerful group of North Carolinians has joined forces to form Citigens United Against the Lottery. The group includes former UNC System President Bill Friday, who earlier this month expressed his opposition in a personal meeting with Easley. Two bishops from the United Methodist Church have sent letters to the editor of various state newspapers, and other religious leaders are also expressing opposition to the renewed call for a lottery.

Basnight, though, said that with South Carolina joing Virginia and Georgia by getting into the lottery business, North Carolina has effective been “boxed in.”


Lawmakers divided

Sen. Bob Carpenter (R-Franklin) — “The last time we counted, we did not have the votes for the lottery. Virginia has a lottery and they have a shortfall of somewhere in the $700 million range. What good is a lottery if you spend more than you have.

“I think a lottery is somewhat incidental to the state budget. The Democratic leadership is intent on spending more than we take in in revenues.

Carpenter is against the lottery in all forms, and said he would vote against it if it came up for a straight up and down vote or for a referendum.

“A lottery is a way to tax poor people to help rich people send their kids to college.

“I am not in favor of a lottery in any form, including a referendum. A referendum is unconstitutional, you can’t have a referendum on something that involves money.

“I think we started too many new programs, particularly those in the last two to three years. We needed to hold them up and then do it when we had the money. This shortfall is going to force us to cut where we shouldn’t be cutting — mental health, welfare and education.”

Carpenter believes the budget should be balanced by leaving education and municipal reimbursements alone. He also voiced opposition to any hike in the sales tax to help alleviate the current fiscal crisis.

“You can’t tax yourself out of a hole. If you take money out of people’s pockets, that sends the economy down. That’s going about solving the problem backwards,” said Carpenter.

---

Sen. Dan Robinson (D-Cullowhee) — Robinson said he would vote for a lottery referendum, but if it came to a straight up vote he would, in all likelihood, vote against it.

“I’ve said from the beginning that I want the people to have the opportunity to vote and make this decision. I think that since the lottery means different things to different people, it is important that they make this decision.”

“I would vote in a minute to allow a referendum,” said Robinson. “It would be very meaningful to know how people felt.”

According to polls he has read, the majority of North Carolina’s citizens support a state lottery. How-ever, Robinson thinks citizens in Western North Carolina are opposed to the lottery.

“In our area, I think there is probably the least support for a lottery. I would like to represent the will of the people I represent. As a public servant, in most cases, we should vote the will of people, so if it came to a straight up and down vote I would probably vote no.”

However, Robinson said he would be “extremely surprised” for the issue to come to a straight vote.

---

Rep. Marge Carpenter (R-Waynesville) — “After doing a lot of research, I can’t find any state with a lottery being successfully in getting more revenue. I would never vote for it, not for a referendum or just for the lottery,” said Carpenter.

“What I’ve found is that you never get further ahead. I don’t think most people would do the research I did, and so I wouldn’t want to hold a referendum.

Carpenter said the lottery did not get any attention in the last session of the General Assembly, and even if the governor tries to push it, she’s not sure it will come up.

“Unless Gov. Easley twists a lot of arms, I don’t see it having the votes. It never went into committee last session.”

---

Rep. Phil Haire (D-Sylva) — “I’ve consistently said if a bill comes up, my first choice would be for a non-binding referendum. Secondly, the money could not go into the general fund because down the road, that is a bad fiscal decision to make. Lottery monies are not consistent and you can’t depend on it.

“The money would have to be used for projects that were one-time expenditures or become a grant pool to build new schools. You don’t want your education system to be funded through a lottery.

“I think it would be extremely difficult to get a bill that would be an up or down vote. It might be possible to get one through that was a non-binding referendum.

Haire said that he “didn’t know where the governor was coming” from as far as his budget figures were concerned.

“Even if a lottery bill passed a straight up vote, it would be several months before it could be set up and any revenue stream could be realized,” said Haire. “I don’t see an immediate impact on the current budget situation.”