"Lottery often gives aid to affluent, takes from poor" by Catherine Cloutier | Globe Staff June 05, 2014
CHELSEA — The line at Tedeschi Food Shops on Washington Avenue extended to the door on a recent Tuesday afternoon as several customers waited to try their luck with a $2 scratch ticket.
Though Chelsea is one of the poorest cities in Massachusetts, its residents are among the most enthusiastic lottery players in the state, spending an average of $1,179 per man, woman, and child on tickets last year, according to state records.
But Chelsea is one of the biggest lottery losers by one key measure: the amount of local aid the city receives from the lottery. In 2013, tickets sold in Chelsea generated $8.2 million, but the city got back only $6.9 million because of a formula that critics say favors affluent towns....
That is the function of state government. Take from the people and give to the wealthy. Always has been, always will be.
A Globe analysis shows that 189 municipalities pay more into the lottery’s local aid fund than they get back as aid....
Many lottery losers are faded blue collar communities such as Revere and Haverhill, or communities on Cape Cod where summer residents give a misleading impression of the year-round population’s wealth.
Who wins and loses in the Mass lottery?
Meanwhile, affluent towns such as Brookline and Milton receive millions more in local aid than residents pay into the fund through lottery sales, largely because the aid distribution formula does not penalize towns that buy relatively few tickets. In all, 162 municipalities received more aid than they contributed to the fund through lottery ticket sales.
“They should give [the money] to people who need it — not people who drive Cadillacs,” said Tom Powers, a 62-year-old Chelsea resident who spends about $35 on lottery tickets each month.
The lottery aid formula was set up to distribute more money to communities with the greatest need, but need is measured in terms of population and property values, which economists say can be misleading.
Massachusetts officials have tried — without success — to address what critics see as the formula’s flaws, including a recent effort by Governor Deval Patrick to shift more aid toward poorer communities by considering municipal income levels in the aid formula.
One longtime overhaul advocate, former mayor David Ragucci of Everett, took his critique a step further in the early 2000s by proposing an Everett-based lottery that would allow his hard luck city to keep all the money it raises from selling tickets.
“It may seem selfish — and in hindsight, it might have been — but as mayor, it was incredibly frustrating for me to watch my community not get the kind of funding it needed or deserved,” said Ragucci. “Something has to happen so that everyone has the same resources.”
But Ragucci’s idea was quickly shot down and efforts to change the statewide aid formula fizzled, in part because it would raise payments to some communities at the expense of others in a time that overall state aid is declining.
How does your community fare with lottery aid?
Local aid was a major selling point of the Massachusetts State Lottery when it launched in 1971, eventually generating billions in ticket sales annually. Twenty percent of the value of every ticket is used to pay for a program called Unrestricted General Government Aid, which provides local aid to cities and towns.
Municipalities use this local aid, which totaled about $900 million in 2013, to repair roads, fund school programs, hire police officers, and pay for other services. And lottery officials are quick to stress that they don’t decide how the money should be divided.
“The Legislature oversees how much money goes back to the communities,” said Beth Bresnahan, executive director of the Massachusetts State Lottery Commission. “The lottery’s sole responsibility is to raise the funds.”
In general, the most aid goes to lower income cities such as Fall River, where the median income is more than $30,000 below the state average, and residents receive $6.5 million more each year than the city pays through lottery sales.
However, many economists and municipal officials believe that the current aid distribution formula falls short in communities where residents buy a lot of lottery tickets and where property values are high but incomes are not.
Inequities are especially pronounced on Cape Cod and the islands, where several communities received little aid despite low median household incomes and high poverty rates....
Many municipal officials, particularly those in low-income cities and towns, say the state has a moral obligation to change the formula since the lottery falls like a regressive tax on their communities. Urban municipalities with lower median household incomes, such as Worcester and Lynn, were among the top sellers of lottery tickets in Massachusetts in the 2013 fiscal year.
Morality and the state do not belong in the same sentence.
Social scientists have long drawn a connection between poverty and lottery gambling. People living in poverty play the lottery at higher rates and are more likely to spend a larger percentage of their earnings on tickets, studies say....
The City of Chelsea continues to struggle financially, in part because of low state aid, said Jay Ash, the city manager of Chelsea. The city has had to defer police hires and decreased the number of teachers in classrooms to combat the budget shortfalls, said Ash....
But the lottery business at retailers such as the Tedeschi’s store on Washington Avenue remains profitable, through a steady flow of $2, $5, and $10 scratch tickets....
And state government thanks you very much.
--more--"
Well, you know what I like to say: Ahlfeld that end$ well.
You scratch one of the new tickets yet?
"New $30 scratch ticket nets $90m in sales so far" by Catalina Gaitan | Globe correspondent May 30, 2014
The state’s most expensive scratch ticket, the $30 World Class Millions, is enticing players who believe that paying big can lead to winning big....
That is (almost) food for the week. I gue$$ I will just have to eat the ticket.
“We felt that the market was ready for a $30 ticket,” said state lottery spokesman Christian Teja. “We’re coming off of a record sales year, and the lottery has been consistently successful, so we thought this was a good time to introduce it.”
As the population becomes more impoverished. Good thing our recovery is better than that of the nation, especially the elite $ections of Bo$ton.
For players who shelled out $30 and lost, the ticket offers five second-chance drawings online. Players can submit their losing ticket number online and be entered to win a $1 million prize.
I usually just throw away the losers (cashing in any winner), and judging by the debris in the gas station parking lot, so are a lot of other people (I'm not littering).
By May 24, two of the $1 million prizes have been claimed.
Not by me. Besides, $1 million is nothing these days. That's chump change.
Massachusetts was not the first to introduce a pricey scratch ticket. Connecticut launched a $30 ticket in 2002, and New Hampshire followed suit in 2009.
--more--"
Related: Grossman Was in Greenfield
At least you can play the casino soon:
"Casino enemies prepare for vote" by Mark Arsenault | Globe staff June 05, 2014
I'm an "enemy" now, not just opposed to the policy.
This goddamn self-internalized war mentality is $ickening in all its forms. This coming on the heels of the same a$$holes bitching about it now.
An antigambling group that has fought for the right to vote on a casino repeal measure is now retooling for the next step: persuading people to vote yes.
Repeal the Casino Deal has hired two experienced political operatives to key campaign posts, revamped its website for a fall referendum, and is uniting individual casino-opposition groups across Massachusetts into a statewide organization.
What the group does not yet know is whether there will be a vote.
I doubt it.
See: Cordy's Conflict of Interest
Also see: Caesars lawsuit against gaming commission chief dismissed
Both sides of the gambling debate are keeping close watch on the Supreme Judicial Court, which is expected to rule by early July whether a casino repeal measure may move ahead to the November ballot.
Repeal activists say they cannot afford to wait to get organized.
“What a shame, if and when we get on the ballot, if we’re not in the process of mobilizing our increasing grass-roots momentum,” said former Massachusetts attorney general Scott Harshbarger, an adviser to the repeal group.
Casino opponents have been working to place a repeal measure on the statewide ballot since lawmakers legalized Las Vegas-style casino gambling in Massachusetts nearly three years ago. Attorney General Martha Coakley ruled last year that the repeal measure was an unconstitutional taking of the implied contract rights of casino applicants and therefore could not be on the ballot. Opponents appealed to the SJC; the court heard arguments on the case in May....
I'm going to scratch the rest of this article. Sorry.
--more--"
Looks like you were the loser, readers.
WTF are you doing here reading this?
