Why six say no to lotto

If Wednesday’s Powerball sales were anything to go by, America is in the throes of lottery fever. The higher the jackpot, the more spending. Is this gambling? Technically, yes; but most don’t count it among serious sins. Is it healthy? While it’s natural to wish for quick solutions and fantasy lives, taking the easy road with a material focus never leads to personal growth.

So, by implication, concluded six states: Alaska, Nevada, Utah, Alabama, Mississippi, and Hawaii. They just say no to lotto, passing on more than $80 billion of income collectively enjoyed by the rest of the U.S. and Canada, according to the North American Association of State and Provincial Lotteries. These dollars fund areas such as education, economic development, and other public programs.

In Utah and the South, known for stronger religious contingents, the objection is pious. Gambling harms the gambler; it’s an addiction, a crutch, and a sin. At least that’s the more popular view. According to interviews cited Jan. 13 in The Monitor Weekly, for legislators who pass or support such laws the reasons are more secular, but similarly ethical.

The lottery’s temptations disproportionately impact the poor, feeding on their desperation and enticing them to spend a greater portion of meager incomes on ticket purchases than do middle- and higher-income folks. Legislators in the no-lotto states say Powerball thus becomes a tax on the poor, who spend more of their ill-afforded discretionary incomes to buy hope of deliverance.

Speaking of money, a 13-year British study found that lottery winners (of between 50 and 200,000 British Pounds, or less than $300,000) tend to become less willing to share it after these unearned wins. This echoed previous research suggesting higher incomes are affiliated with less proportionate generosity. Those with left-leaning affiliations in the British study also tended to switch to Britain’s Conservative Party after winning 500 Pounds (about $720) or more.

Does this mean self-interest shifts after material gain? Does it mean our political philosophies shift according to personal resources?

Mississippi has gambling boats, sailing just far enough from shore to avoid the state ban. Nevertheless, like Utah, a majority of its legislators adhere to religious beliefs that consider gambling spiritually destructive.

Less spiritual was Alaska’s reason for rejecting lotteries. A state report concluded simply that the population was too sparse to create sales sufficient to justify the effort. Hawaii is more obtuse about its reasons, but The Monitor article suggested fears that gambling would harm tourism.

Nevada is an interesting state, where residents quickly point out that its casinos and flashy reputation hardly belie its focus on family life, well-ranked schools, and natural playgrounds. Yet the casino lobby, not religion or ethics, is credited with keeping the lottery out of Nevada. No get-rich-quick competition tolerated; dollars belong in slot machines, if you please. If all gambling is bad, in the case of Nevada, the profits line more corporate than public pockets.

The millions each week who lose the lottery (this writer included) may find consolation in the idea that we have (not-so) narrowly escaped such philosophical conundra. At least until purchasing the next ticket.

Sholeh Patrick is a columnist for the Hagadone News Network who tries to learn from her cat: A cozy bed, a full bowl, and a little loving attention make life perfect.