Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About Street roots. (Portland, OR) 1998-current | View Entire Issue (April 24, 2015)
News Page 4 Street Roots • April 24-May 1,2015 Legislating the Lottery Oregon Lottery’s deli-retailers survive another bill while the state gambling agency considers the revival o f sports betting BY EM ILY GREEN STAFF W R IT E R ep. Kathleen Taylor (D-Southeast Portland), following in the footsteps of her predecessor and longtime Oregon Lottery adversary, Carolyn Tomei, took aim at the state’s lottery division this session with three bills she hopes will ultimately help to protect vulnerable Oregonians from problem gambling. However, the money machine that is the Oregon Lottery is proving a tough windmill to tilt. A bill that would have classified the 119 businesses in Oregon that derive more than half their revenue from lottery saies as “casinos” - and therefore illegal under existing state statute J died in committee afteb t^ tim w y fromOregon Lottery ' Director Jack Roberts. Roberts told committee members Such closures could potentially cost the state $100 million in lost revenue every two years. In 2013 a similar bill introduced by House Speaker Tina Kotek would have had the same effect and also died in committee. While Taylor’s casino bill, which packed the most punch - and the greatest fiscal that’s reported could be misleading because impact - died almost immediately, two Oregon Lottery retailers only exist in others are moving forward and have locations zoned for retail. garnered the support of Oregon Lottery. “People that live there - not necessarily One would require that Oregon Lottery the people th at shop there and do business report the locations and density of its video there - but that live there, tend to be lower gaming terminals along with the income,” Roberts says. “H ie residential socioeconomic makeup of the surrounding areas normally where you have more middle neighborhoods. class as well as affluent people are zoned in “Anecdotally, we a way where you don’t have bars and think (video lottery taverns in the neighborhood.” terminals) are overly- “We have to be careful in how we concentrated in interpret that,” he says. “But, yeah, we’d be "(Retailers) don't want people poorer interested to see. I mean, it’s certainly not to leave because they run out of neighborhoods, our belief that these are mostly areas where money? bat they also want them preying on people there are poor people, I know that who can least afford to keep playing -* so that's the allegation is often made, but we do annual i t But we have no mixed message th a t the lottery surveys about who plays our games and it data,” says Taylor. does not appear that it’s primarily poor represents." “This will help us — JACK ROBERTS people.” D IR E C T O R , O R E G O N L O T T E R Y gather better data Roberts says Oregon Lottery has also about where our approached upscale restaurants, but their lottery revenue is proprietors generally don’t want to install coming from.” video lottery terminals in their bars. The other bill will simply codify a code of Oregon Lottery’s most recent survey of ethics recently adopted by Oregon Lottery game players does not show they earn less so that future administrations will be than the median income, however data was required to abide by i t not broken oiit by type of game, so the Whether the bills pass or no t, Roberts figures include players who only buy says he will follow through with their proposals, but it remains unclear whether or Powerball, Scratch-its and Megabucks tickets as well as those who primarily play not they will lead’to any significant changes video lottery. in the way Oregon Lottery conducts Data collected on people in Oregon’s business. problem gambling treatment programs Roberts warns the socioeconomic data K shows that thé hoùsehold income of those seeking treatment for gambling addiction is, on average, about $20,000 less than Oregon’s median household income. Of Oregon’s problem gamblers, 89 percent say video lottery is their game of choice, according to the 2014 Oregon Gambling Program Evaluation Report. “I don’t have all the data,” says Roberts, “but does the burden fall disproportionately on the poor? Yes. Even if they are not thé large majority of the people playing, they’re more likely to be playing with money they cannot afford to lose and so they can fall faster, and that’s a problem. But we can’t ask people to file a financial statement before we let them gamble, and we aren’t able to discriminate based on what we think their income is, so I think it’s part of a society-wide problem that we have to address and deal with.” He says Oregon Lottery’s new retailer contracts include new provisions relating to problem gambling training for key employees and information about problem gambling treatment being made available at their establishments. He says about 60 percent of retailers have signed the new contract. “By and large it’s been pretty well received,” Roberts says. “These folks don’t want to have people becoming problem See LOTTERY, page 5 P H O T O BY E L IZ A B E T H S M IT H Above: The Lucky Spot deli is one o f 31 businesses in M ultnom ah County that derives more than 50 percent o f its income from video lottery. Oregon Lottery Director Jack Roberts says his agency is working with establishments in this category to operate “in a w a y that people d on’t walk by a nd say, T h a t’s a mini- casino.’”
