  | ||
|
|
Ethics, Revised Edition Lotteries Definition: Government-run activities involving chance selections in which people buy numbered tickets, and cash awards are granted based on numbers being drawn by lot Type of Ethics: Politico-economic ethics Significance: Once almost universally rejected as ethically unacceptable, lotteries and other forms of state-supported gambling have become major sources of revenue for U.S. states reluctant to raise taxes; they have also created new ethical challenges for governments. Until the late twentieth century, a widespread American ethos rejected state support for any form of gambling. Objections were based mainly on Protestant Christian beliefs, which held that gambling itself was morally wrong. Political jurisdictions with majorities or substantial minorities of Roman Catholic voters tended to be more tolerant of some forms of gambling. Forms of gambling based on contests depending partly on skill--such as betting on horse racing--generally had better chances of public acceptance. By contrast, lotteries and casino gambling--which depend on pure luck--were slower to gain acceptance. Even without an absolutist moral stance, the dominant American attitude still rejected state-supported gambling out of a fear that such support would give a stamp of approval to an unwise or savory practice. By the last third of the twentieth century, Americans were becoming more tolerant of gambling. While casino gambling had long been associated almost exclusively with the state of Nevada, other states became willing to experiment with it to add new sources of tax revenue. The idea that a state should enter the gambling business itself by sponsoring its own lottery did not begin until the state of New Hampshire started its lottery in 1964. Lotteries then spread slowly to other states, but the trend gained speed as states found they were facing revenue losses as they competed with states with lotteries. Lotteries could only be acceptable when an absolute moral standard condemning gambling was replaced by a standard closer to utilitarianism. Challenges to the utilitarian ethical arguments as proper moral mode of argument are well known, especially for those who attack utilitarianism on absolutist religious grounds, but they lead to only one kind of ethical debate. Other debates occur even within utilitarianism particularly when state sponsorship is an alternative to taxation. Proponents of state-sponsored gambling argue that the propensity to gamble is so widespread that it will flourish without state sponsorship, as it has historically, even in the face of rigorous state prohibition. Given this fact, proponents argue that the state should at least cash in on a practice that will continue in any event. Gambling may even be seen as a boon providing funds for education or other welfare activities that cannot be provided given a public reluctance to raise taxes. This argument is strengthened any time a non-lottery state faces competition from neighboring lottery states. Arguments Against Lotteries Opponents challenge state-sponsored gambling on grounds of hidden social costs as individuals, especially with low incomes, gamble away money that should properly be used to care for their dependents. For those low-income individuals succumbing to a gambling addiction, the state may be encouraging the impoverishment of families, especially poor families with children. Gambling may even be associated with other social problems, such as alcoholism and drug addiction. By supporting gambling, the state may seem to encourage other maladies. Above all, by supporting gambling, the state may promote get-rich-quick attitudes that contribute to eroding the work and savings ethic badly needed in any society. Opponents clearly see state-sponsored gambling as having deleterious social consequences. Opponents bolster their arguments with statistics tending to show that the welfare cost of treating the victims may outweigh the revenue gain. Such statistics require complicated calculations and are frequently challenged by gambling's proponents, who have continued to argue that the urge to gamble is so widespread that gambling will occur whether the state sponsors it or not. These ethical arguments frequently lead to another debate over the size of government. Opponents of large governments tend to argue that governments are more likely to be kept small if they must receive all their revenue from taxes. Because lotteries provide additional, nontax, revenue, they thus may encourage overly large governments. Lottery revenues are not guaranteed and may fall after the novelty interest in lotteries wears off or if excessive number of states begin to use lotteries. If the enlarged government's programs become seen as entitlements, then those programs may be difficult to eliminate--or even trim--after lottery revenues subside. Taxes may then have to be raised to support the programs. Since states often rely on regressive taxes, the tax burden on low-income individuals may be even more severe as they are caught in a scissors-like situation in which their taxes go up as their state benefits go down. For all these reasons, ethical debates over lotteries and other forms of state-sponsored gambling are likely to continue to dominate public discussion over lotteries. Richard L. Wilson BibliographyBorg, Mary O., Paul M. Mason, and Stephen L. Shapiro. The Economic Consequences of State Lotteries. New York: Greenwood Publishing Group, 1991. Cook, Philip J., and Charles T. Clotfelter. Selling Hope: State Lotteries in America. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1991. Douglas, Andrew. The National Lottery and Its Regulation: Process, Problems, and Personalities. New York: Continuum, 2002. Duxby, Neil. Random Justice: On Lotteries and Legal Decision Making. New York: Oxford, 2003. Mason, John Lyman, Michael Nelson, and Richard C. Leon. Governing Gambling. New York: Twentieth Century Fund, 2001. Nibert, David. Hitting the Lottery Jackpot: State Government and the Taxing of Dreams. New York: Monthly Review Press, 2000. Von Hermann, Denise. The Big Gamble: The Politics of Lottery. Boulder, Colo.: Praeger, 2003. See Also Betting on sports; Income distribution; Native American casinos; Taxes; Vice; Will. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
If you need help with products and ordering, setting up a new account or working with this website, call or email us:
 |
SALEM PRESS, INC. · 131 North El Molino Avenue · Pasadena · CA 91101 © Salem Press, Inc. All Rights Reserved. |