In addition, evidence shows that as gambling becomes more common, the incidence of problem gambling increases. The costs are not borne by the state directly, but rather by average citizens due to increased bankruptcy, theft, insurance fraud and other white-collar crimes committed by problem gamblers. A recent report reveals that Texas, New York, Ohio, Kentucky, New Mexico, Wisconsin, Virginia, and Iowa have all experienced or are expecting a decline in lottery revenue. On average, states with lotteries spend a smaller proportion of their budgets on education than states that do not have a lottery. The lottery is often touted as a source for educational funding, but other uses have also been suggested.
History shows that North Carolina policymakers have serious spending problems.
Collecting revenue through a lottery is essentially a voluntary tax. Yes, but a look at who spends money on lotteries reveals that it hits poor consumers the hardest. Numerous studies that compare education levels, ethnic background, age, and income levels show that the amount of money spent does not significantly vary among these factors. The lottery debate is incomplete without addressing this fact, considering the widespread support for a tax system that is low, flat, fair and honest and provides relief for those at the bottom of the income scale. The provision in the 1999 Lottery for Education that earmarks 50 percent of state revenue for infrastructure and bond debt casts serious doubt that North Carolinians will see their state taxes shrink anytime soon.