Lottery looms over South Carolina ballot

Web posted October 22, 2000

 Have a thought? Go to the @ugusta Forums.
 Lottery Web sites

By Margaret N. O' Shea
Staff Writer

Lynn Counts of North Augusta purchases Big Game lottery tickets at the Shell gas station on 13th and Ellis Streets in Georgia. CHRIS THELEN/STAFF

It might be the biggest question on the ballot in South Carolina this fall.

The answer depends on whether voters think a lottery would be a plunge into perdition or a heavenward boost for education in a state that ranks low by every national standard.

Campaigns are in high gear with two weeks and two days left to persuade the undecided before Nov. 7.

If the lottery hinged on the battle of the yard signs, it would lose in Aiken County and many other counties around the state, informal polls suggest. But more scientific polls say the outcome is too close to call.

That's a significant shift from every poll taken in the past decade, when as many as 65 percent of South Carolinians said they would favor a lottery to help pay for better education. In 1998, voters elected Gov. Jim Hodges - the first Democrat to hold that South Carolina office in a quarter-century - largely on the basis of campaign promises that he would seek the lottery referendum now looming.

As late as January, 62 percent of voters favored a lottery. But in September, two new polls showed the gap was closing. One showed the pro-lottery stance did not have majority support, and the other showed the lottery losing.

That's when Mr. Hodges started stumping the state and came out with a 24-page plan for how lottery proceeds would be used and how a lottery would operate. The plan includes free tuition in technical schools, and because the Legislature already has enacted $3,000 scholarships for college students, the lottery would provide a supplement, bringing financial aid to $7,000 a year for the best and the brightest. The plan also includes tuition for teachers to go back to school, construction funds and money for local schools and colleges to use as they please.

``People are starting to look at what the lottery can do for education,'' said Kevin Geddings, the governor's former chief of staff who left that post to head the Columbia-based South Carolina Education Lottery Coalition. ``Ultimately, they are going to vote for a lottery for education. This state has a good record of voting progressively on ballot issues.''

But the plan has added fuel to the No Lottery 2000 campaign, led by Kathy Bigham of Rock Hill - the same woman who spearheaded the fight against video poker up to its demise earlier this year. The grass-roots tactics are much the same, and some of the signs simply have the word ``lottery'' pasted over ``video poker'' under an adamant ``no.''

Unlike Georgia, where voters approved a lottery in 1993, South Carolina has no enabling legislation in place. That means voters will be writing the Legislature a ``blank check'' to work out the details if the lottery referendum passes, Mrs. Bigham said. The Legislature does not have to follow the governor's plan.

It's not unusual for initiatives to be put to voters in a bare-bones form that gets fleshed out later, said Bill Moore, a political science professor at College Charleston. But the absence of enabling legislation on the lottery has aroused distrust, and it was a key factor in the NAACP's decision to oppose the lottery although most of its members are Democrats and the Democratic Executive Committee is for it.

Two weeks ago, when the anti-lottery tour bus stopped briefly in Aiken, Mrs. Bigham smiled broadly as resident Republican Sen. Greg Ryberg reminded the small crowd gathered on Newberry Street: ``The governor doesn't even have a vote'' on any lottery legislation.

In Aiken - one of just 12 counties of South Carolina's 46 to vote against allowing video poker in 1994, only to have the referendum thrown out by the state Supreme Court - the No Lottery 2000 movement is strong. When GOP Chairman David Nix drove to Rock Hill for 1,000 yard signs, he saw them disappear quickly, stacks of them going to local churches that are distributing them.

Jim Guth, a Furman University political science professor who has studied anti-gambling movements, says churches could make a sizable difference in the vote, as conservative Protestants did in defeating a lottery in Alabama last year.

In South Carolina the church opposition is even stronger. It includes the Christian Action Council, all the major denominations and several smaller ones. That includes the state's largest religious denomination, Southern Baptists, and the United Methodists, Mr. Hodges' church.

Contributors to the pro-lottery campaign include firms connected with lotteries in other states that might profit from another one and several companies that have contracts with the state for goods and services. Most donations to the anti-lottery campaign have come from churches and individuals.

The contrast has led lottery foes to suggest that major gambling interests want a foot in South Carolina's door.

Click on graphic for a larger version. STAFF

What is clear is that there is plenty of money from motley sources in the fight. Earlier this year, both sides were expecting to collect about $1 million to finance their campaigns, and they're expected to spend $300,000 on advertising between now and election day.

The pro-lottery camp is concentrating on an advertising blitz, and Bubba is back. The baseball-capped character, played by actor Kerry Maher, was a key figure in Mr. Hodges' lottery-themed gubernatorial race. Those ads featured Bubba talking about the $100 million-plus that South Carolinians spend on Georgia lottery tickets every year. The catch phrase was, ``We just luuuv David Beasley.'' Mr. Beasley was the incumbent governor, who opposed Mr. Hodges' lottery proposal.

The new commercials, shot in an Eastover convenience store, show Bubba urging folks in the neighboring state not to ``ruin it for us by getting your own lottery. Just remember, here in Georgia we luuuv South Carolinians buying our lottery tickets.''

The Education Lottery group also has aired an ad touting Mr. Hodges' plans for the proceeds, and it has prominent billboards that say, ``What's green and goes 70 mph?'' The answer: ``Your money headed for the Georgia Lottery.''

The anti-lottery campaign is more focused on people-to-people contact, using the tour bus, local rallies and town meetings. It also relies heavily on local groups set up earlier to oppose video poker, using them until the registration cutoff Oct. 7 to bring in voters in droves and contact friends and neighbors and to boost absentee voting by people who qualify.

Stumping the state on their own are two of Mr. Hodges' potential opponents in 2002 - Lt. Gov. Bob Peeler and Secretary of State Jim Miles, who started his own anti-lottery group, the Bipartisan Lottery Opposition Committee.

No Lottery 2000 has run some radio and TV ads stressing the ``dirty little secret'' that lotteries prey on the poor and minorities - a theme that the Rev. Jesse Jackson's Rainbow PUSH Coalition supports.

The anti-lottery forces also are saying that 45 percent of the pro-lottery campaign's donations come from out of state, many of them from ``big gambling companies in Chicago, Atlanta and Paris. That's right - Paris.''

Here is a look at the 37 states (and the District of Columbia) with lotteries, the year they were established, how they performed in fiscal year 1999 and where the revenue is spent. Information provided by the North American Association of State and Provincial Lotteries and the World Lottery Association:

Arizona: Established 1981

Sales: $268.26 million

Revenue to state: $80.5 million (30 percent of sales)

Goes to: Education primarily; also to general fund for transportation, wildlife and parks, recreation, and economic development

California: 1985

Sales: $2.49 billion

Revenue to state: $900.8 million (36 percent)

Goes to: Public education

Colorado: 1983

Sales: $358 million

Revenue to state: $98.7 million (27.6 percent)

Goes to: State parks, outdoor recreation, conservation trust fund

Connecticut: 1972

Sales: $871 million

Revenue to state: $271.3 million (31.2 percent)

Goes to: The general fund

Delaware: 1975

Sales: $527.43 million

Revenue to state: $166.9 million (31.7 percent)

Goes to: The general fund

District of Columbia: 1982

Sales: $134.9 million

Revenue to state: $69.2 million (32 percent)

Goes to: The general fund

Florida: 1987

Sales: $2.178 billion

Revenue to state: $800.7 million (36.8 percent)

Goes to: Education

Georgia: 1993

Sales: $2.034 billion

Revenue to state: $646.7 million (31.8 percent)

Goes to: Education

Idaho: 1989

Sales: $90.45 million

Revenue to state: $20.6 (20.6 percent)

Goes to: Public schools and buildings

Illinois: 1974

Sales: $1.52 billion

Revenue to state: $540 million (35.4 percent)

Goes to: Education

Indiana: 1989

Sales: $681 million

Revenue to state: $204.8 million (30.1 percent)

Goes to: Pensions for teachers and police, capital projects, technology for schools and libraries, and subsidy to lower license plate taxes

Iowa: 1985

Sales: $184.07 million

Revenue to state: $45.8 million (24.9 percent)

Goes to: The general fund and treatment for addicted gamblers

Kansas: 1987

Sales: $198.92 million

Revenue to state: $61 million (30.5 percent)

Goes to: Economic development incentives, adult and juvenile corrections building funds, and the state's general fund

Kentucky: 1989

Sales: $583.15 million

Revenue to state: $161.8 million (27.7 percent)

Goes to: Education, including a special program for Vietnam veterans; law enforcement; capital building projects; road repairs

Louisiana: 1991

Sales: $289.04 million

Revenue to state: $106.9 (37 percent)

Goes to: The general fund, with $150,000 for a gambling hot line

Maine: 1974

Sales: $144.54 million

Revenue to state: $41.37 million (28.6 percent)

Goes to: The general fund

Maryland: 1973

Sales: $1.080 billion

Revenue to state: $400 million (36.8 percent)

Goes to: The general fund

Massachusetts: 1972

Sales: $3.365 billion

Revenue to state: $809.1 million (24 percent)

Goes to: Local governments, the arts, general fund and gambling addictions

Michigan: 1972

Sales: $1.73 billion

Revenue to state: $622.3 million (35.2 percent)

Goes to: Education

Minnesota: 1990

Sales: $390.01 million

Revenue to state: $85.7 million (22 percent)

Goes to: Environmental and Natural Resources Trust Fund, the general fund and treatment for gambling addiction

Missouri: 1986

Sales: $513.33 million

Revenue to state: $154.8 million (30.2 percent)

Goes to: Education

Montana: 1986

Sales: $30 million

Revenue to state: $6.8 million (22.7 percent)

Goes to: The general fund

Nebraska: 1993

Sales: $72.36 million

Revenue to state: $18.3 million (25.3 percent)

Goes to: Trust funds for education innovation and the environment and to assist compulsive gamblers

New Hampshire: 1964

Sales: $199.20 million

Revenue to state: $64 million (32.1 percent)

Goes to: Education

New Jersey: 1970

Sales: $1.658 billion

Revenue to state: $652 million (39.3 percent)

Goes to: Education and institutions

New Mexico: 1996

Sales: $89.23 million

Revenue to state: $19.7 million (22.1 percent)

Goes to: Education

New York: 1967

Sales: $3.697 billion

Revenue to state: $1.413 billion (38.2 percent)

Goes to: Education

Ohio: 1974

Sales: $2.144 billion

Revenue to state: $696.2 million (32.5 percent)

Goes to: Education

Oregon: 1984

Sales: $733.3 million

Revenue to state: $310.5 million (42.6 percent)

Goes to: Education, economic development, job creation

Pennsylvania: 1971

Sales: $1.668 billion

Revenue to state: $668.2 million (40 percent)

Goes to: Senior citizen programs

Rhode Island: 1974

Sales: $741.170 million

Revenue to state: $133.4 million (18 percent)

Goes to: The general fund

South Dakota: 1987

Sales: $548.21 million

Revenue to state: $97 million (17.7 percent)

Goes to: The general fund

Texas: 1991

Sales: $2.572 billion

Revenue to state: $875 million (34 percent)

Goes to: Education

Vermont: 1977

Sales: $70.39 million

Revenue to state: $19.1 million (27.1 percent)

Goes to: The general fund

Virginia: 1988

Sales: $934.6 million

Revenue to state: $321.4 million (34.4 percent)

Goes to: The general fund, mainly for education but also for natural resources, health and human services, transportation, government and economic development

Washington: 1982

Sales: $473.40 million

Revenue to state: $112.9 million (23.9 percent)

Goes to: The general fund for education, human services, natural resources, sports

West Virginia: 1986

Sales: $393.6 million

Revenue to state: $119 million (30.4 percent)

Goes to: Education, tourism, senior citizen programs, capital projects, arts and sciences, and parks

Wisconsin: 1988

Sales: $418.57 million

Revenue to state: $134.9 million (31.5 percent)

Goes to: Property tax relief

To learn more

To read more about lotteries, check the Web site of the National Association of State and Provincial Lotteries at www.naspl.org.

It includes a history of lotteries back to biblical times and links to all the lotteries in the United States and Canada, information about the money they make and how they spend it, lottery organizations and resources, suppliers of goods and services, gambling research and information about problem gambling.

To read about the South Carolina referendum from both perspectives, for and against a lottery, visit the South Carolina Education Lottery Coalition at www.sclottery2000.com and No Lottery 2000 at www.nolottery2000.com.

There's also a Bipartisan Lottery Opposition Committee at www.jimmiles.net.

Here is a look at the 37 states (and the District of Columbia) with lotteries, the year they were established, how they performed in fiscal year 1999 and where the revenue is spent. Information provided by the North American Association of State and Provincial Lotteries and the World Lottery Association:

Submit Your Opinion Name: Email: Enter your comments here