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.’”