Lottery is odds-on favorite

Web posted Wednesday, November 8, 2000

 Have a thought? Go to the @ugusta Forums.

By Margaret N. O'Shea
South Carolina Bureau

South Carolina teetered late Tuesday on the brink of becoming the 38th state with a lottery to help pay its bills.

With 93 percent of the statewide vote tallied, support for a lottery was leading 669,649 to 559,950. While the balance still could have tipped either way with some strong returns, The Associated Press predicted a lottery win less than two hours after polls had closed.

87% of precincts reporting

Question 1: Legalize Lottery YES 55% NO 45%

The bitter fight between lottery proponents and foes was evident in the numbers as precincts reported - a tug of war in some counties. And they reflected what polls have said all along - the issue sharply divided voters.

Yet proponents took an early lead that did not waver as the tallies climbed. Exit polls showed that support for the lottery was high among black voters, Democrats and middle-income voters.

But at 10:30 p.m., the vote remained far from complete, with no results from outlying precincts, rural precincts with paper ballots and a handful of other counties. And both sides remained hopeful.

Kathy Bigham of No Lottery 2000 found herself ending the day as she began it: in prayer with other foes of a state-run lottery. And lottery proponents watched returns come in with rising spirits.

If the late-night trend held, it would be a major victory for Gov. Jim Hodges, who took office two years ago on an education lottery platform. Some analysts had predicted that a loss on this issue would cost him dearly.

``If this lottery fails, you can add a new title to Jim Hodges' name. That's former governor,'' said Clemson University political scientist David Woodard, a Republican. Mr. Hodges' term will be up in 2002.

The referendum on Tuesday's ballot provided that proceeds from the lottery, if voters lifted a constitutional ban, would go solely to education.

Details would be hammered out by the state Legislature when it reconvenes early in 2001 - the aspect that lottery opponents called a risky ``blank check.''

Mr. Hodges wants a South Carolina lottery closely modeled after Georgia's, and he has developed a 24-page plan for spending the anticipated revenues. But with enabling legislation yet to be developed, there's no guarantee that lawmakers will follow that blueprint.

The governor stumped throughout the state last week, part of the time with the help of Georgia Gov. Roy Barnes and the states' first ladies. Although some state lotteries are not performing to expectations, Georgia's has done well since it began in 1993, pulling in $3.7 billion in the past two years and funneling $1.2 million into scholarships and other programs.

Incomplete returns showed Aiken County voters much closer on the issue than expected and possibly throwing support to the lottery despite a well-oiled no-vote machine. With 26 of the county's 70 precincts reporting, Aiken County voters were saying yes to a lottery, 9,481 to 7,778.

Anti-gambling sentiment runs especially high in Aiken, which was one of only 12 counties of the state's 46 to vote against allowing video poker within its borders in 1984. The state Supreme Court ruled in that case that what was legal in some counties could not be illegal in others, and video poker became a booming business.

Last year, the Legislature tried again to let the public decide if video poker should be legal. It would have been on the ballot last November if the state's high court hadn't ruled that referendum out, saying the Legislature couldn't slough its job onto the people. The referendum legislation was written to make video gambling illegal unless voters opted to keep it.

The anti-poker machine then shifted gears to oppose a lottery. Gov. Hodges' chief of staff left that job to head a pro-lottery campaign, later joined by the governor's press secretary, using vacation time to work for the boss's goal.

Tuesday's referendum does not have the legal problem that the video poker referendum did. In that case, the court said that the people had elected lawmakers to make such decisions, and lawmakers couldn't duck the responsibility. In the case of a lottery, the state constitution would have to be changed to allow it. And that can't be done without a statewide vote.

Reach Margaret N. O'Shea at (803) 279-6895.

Submit Your Opinion Name: Email: Enter your comments here