State lotteries: Explaining their popularity

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

4 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

This article provides a detailed explanation for the adoption of state lotteries as revenue measures. It focuses on Texas for examples. Relying on a previously published set of evaluative criteria for revenue sources, the authors explain why, despite generally negative treatment of state lotteries by revenue experts, lotteries are favored by legislatures and publics in thirty-four states and the District of Columbia. As revenue matters rather thangeneral policy matters, lotteries are politically expedient and have sufficiently large yields to overshadow shortcomings noted by experts and critics: regressivity, high administrative costs, instability, lower than anticipated yields, and potential negative social consequences. This look at policy-maker and public evaluation of state lotteries explains their widespread utilitization.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1015-1033
Number of pages19
JournalInternational Journal of Public Administration
Volume16
Issue number7
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 1993
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

popularity
revenue
expert
social effects
critic
district
State lotteries
Revenue
costs
evaluation
Lottery

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Business and International Management
  • Public Administration

Cite this

State lotteries : Explaining their popularity. / McKinney, Evelyn.

In: International Journal of Public Administration, Vol. 16, No. 7, 01.01.1993, p. 1015-1033.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{4744776878f646c79a7bd2d79bbe08fa,
title = "State lotteries: Explaining their popularity",
abstract = "This article provides a detailed explanation for the adoption of state lotteries as revenue measures. It focuses on Texas for examples. Relying on a previously published set of evaluative criteria for revenue sources, the authors explain why, despite generally negative treatment of state lotteries by revenue experts, lotteries are favored by legislatures and publics in thirty-four states and the District of Columbia. As revenue matters rather thangeneral policy matters, lotteries are politically expedient and have sufficiently large yields to overshadow shortcomings noted by experts and critics: regressivity, high administrative costs, instability, lower than anticipated yields, and potential negative social consequences. This look at policy-maker and public evaluation of state lotteries explains their widespread utilitization.",
author = "Evelyn McKinney",
year = "1993",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1080/01900699308524833",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "16",
pages = "1015--1033",
journal = "International Journal of Public Administration",
issn = "0190-0692",
publisher = "Taylor and Francis Ltd.",
number = "7",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - State lotteries

T2 - Explaining their popularity

AU - McKinney, Evelyn

PY - 1993/1/1

Y1 - 1993/1/1

N2 - This article provides a detailed explanation for the adoption of state lotteries as revenue measures. It focuses on Texas for examples. Relying on a previously published set of evaluative criteria for revenue sources, the authors explain why, despite generally negative treatment of state lotteries by revenue experts, lotteries are favored by legislatures and publics in thirty-four states and the District of Columbia. As revenue matters rather thangeneral policy matters, lotteries are politically expedient and have sufficiently large yields to overshadow shortcomings noted by experts and critics: regressivity, high administrative costs, instability, lower than anticipated yields, and potential negative social consequences. This look at policy-maker and public evaluation of state lotteries explains their widespread utilitization.

AB - This article provides a detailed explanation for the adoption of state lotteries as revenue measures. It focuses on Texas for examples. Relying on a previously published set of evaluative criteria for revenue sources, the authors explain why, despite generally negative treatment of state lotteries by revenue experts, lotteries are favored by legislatures and publics in thirty-four states and the District of Columbia. As revenue matters rather thangeneral policy matters, lotteries are politically expedient and have sufficiently large yields to overshadow shortcomings noted by experts and critics: regressivity, high administrative costs, instability, lower than anticipated yields, and potential negative social consequences. This look at policy-maker and public evaluation of state lotteries explains their widespread utilitization.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0344387501&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0344387501&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/01900699308524833

DO - 10.1080/01900699308524833

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:0344387501

VL - 16

SP - 1015

EP - 1033

JO - International Journal of Public Administration

JF - International Journal of Public Administration

SN - 0190-0692

IS - 7

ER -