Lottery lows

By Jennifer J. Foster

Published: July 8, 2008

Seems like the idea comes up every year, in some form or another: A lottery in Alabama.

For EDUCATION, you know.

Wink, wink.

Well, sometimes the perceived panacea presents a plethora of problems all its own. From CNN’s American Morning:

When Scott Hoover bought a $5 scratch-off ticket in Virginia called “Beginner’s Luck” last summer, he carefully studied the odds. Even though he figured his chances of winning were a long shot, he felt the odds were reasonable.

Hoover, a business professor at Washington and Lee University in Virginia, wasn’t surprised when his tickets didn’t bring him the $75,000 grand prize, but he was shocked to learn the top prize had been awarded before he bought the ticket.

“I felt duped into buying these things,“ Hoover said.

He discovered the Virginia State Lottery was continuing to sell tickets for games in which the top prizes were no longer available. Public records showed that someone had already won the top prize one month before Hoover played. He is now suing the state of Virginia for breach of contract.

“It’s one thing to say it’s a long shot to win the $75,000, but it’s another thing to say you have no shot to win it,“ said John Fishwick, Hoover’s attorney.

Through a request filed under the Freedom of Information Act, Fishwick’s firm was able to obtain records that showed the Virginia State Lottery sold $85 million in tickets for which no top prize was available. Fishwick says the state should pay $85 million in damages.

The story goes on to say that about half of the 42 states that have lotteries were, as of early July, continuing to sell tickets after the top prizes are claimed, according to USA Today estimates.

State lottery officials defend the fairness of their games, arguing that since most prize money is awarded to second-, third- and fourth-place winners, just because the top prize isn’t available doesn’t mean the tickets are guaranteed losers.

Besides, they argue, their respective web sites make it clear what prizes are still on the table and what prizes aren’t.

Virginia lottery chief Paula Otto said, “Yes, there were times when there was a scratch game out there that might’ve said ‘zero’ in terms of the number of top prizes, but our players knew that.“

Dominick DeMarco, a spokesman with the New Jersey Lottery, gave a similar explanation for why tickets for the state’s “$1,000,000 Explosion” scratch-off game were still on sale last week, even though the million-dollar grand prize was already awarded. Information about winning tickets and prizes is readily available on the lottery web site and at retail outlets, he said.

Yeah, because availability always translates into accountability. Right, people-who-advocate-unlimited-campaign-contributions-as-long-as-they’re-listed-online?

Wrong. That’s exactly why they’re available online: Because they know regular folks—the folks who don’t spend 24 hours a day, seven days a week, 52 weeks out of the year studying politics and the labrynthine records politicians produce (or, in this case, lottery results)—don’t have the time or the inclination to sift through those databases. Disclosure does not necessarily mean scrutiny.

Simply put, it’s a cop-out.

So, I guess it’s a good thing we don’t have a lottery in Alabama.

After all, we don’t want any of that nasty gambling in our state.

Except at dog tracks ... and bingo halls ... and Indian casinos ... and on cruise ships ...