Lottery supporters must be ecstatic about Gov. Mike Easley’s 2001-2003 budget proposal. He includes projected revenues from a lottery as a way to fund some of his programs. In truth, however, the governor would have been smarter to offer a proposal based on actual revenues from more reliable sources.

According to the proposal released last week, Easley thinks the lottery will generate about $600 million annually in revenues. The $14.5 billion total spending package will need those “additional revenues” to get the job done, Easley said.

Many of Easley’s budget goals are admirable. He wants to spend 80 percent of his budget increases on education programs. His plan includes reducing class sizes in grades K-3, enlarging the teacher expense account for classroom supplies, and additional money for a voluntary pre-kindergarten program. He wants a commission to find business tax loopholes

To do this, Easley says we will need the money generated from a state lottery. There is little chance legislators will do that on their own. Instead, what is more likely is that they will OK a referendum and let voters make the decision. Easley projects the monies would become available in May 2002 after the referendum.

If voters approve a state lottery, the money should be earmarked for education only. Our public schools continue to need money in many different areas, and focusing on early childhood development would prove a wise investment. Countless studies show that these first few years in school are absolutely vital if students are to continue to achieve as they progress through higher grades.

But it remains to be seen if Tar Heels will support a lottery. A coalition of former governors, education leaders, and even former UNC basketball coach Dean Smith held a press conference last week denouncing Easley’s lottery ambitions. The facts are that lotteries do prey on lower-income families, and the advertising encourages people to spend money on a game of chance rather than put it in savings. We think that, despite its passage in states all around us, there is a strong dislike among many here for the lottery.

Easley walked into office amid the state’s worst budget crisis in memory. Solving it will take hard work, and legislators and citizens opposed to a lottery need to offer their own proposals for finding additional revenues or cutting spending. But Easley’s reliance on a state lottery is a poor first step in addressing the current fiscal problem.

 

Back to Top
The Smoky Mountain News