Ohio lottery failing to make grade on earnings, profits

A top-to-bottom review of the Ohio lottery shows an 81.4 million decrease in transfers to the state's education fund over the past nine years and an overall decrease in revenue during the same period -- from 2.455 billion to 2.255 billion.
The lottery obviously isn't performing the way legislators anticipated when they established it in 1996, which suggests that it's time for the Ohio General Assembly to revisit the program.
Indeed, the review, conducted by Gov. Ted Strickland's transition team on the lottery, reveals that Ohio has a low level of net profit transfers to the education fund as a percentage of gross sales compared with neighboring states with similar populations -- Illinois, Michigan, New York and Pennsylvania.
In addition to exploring why the Ohio lottery is not performing better, the legislative inquiry should also focus on the recommendations made by the transition team.
Boosting profits
The most controversial of those -- it has already drawn opposition from members of the Ohio Lottery Commission -- has to do with boosting profits. The panel says the 59 percent prize payouts is too high compared with states like Pennsylvania and Michigan and that a smaller percentage would pay dividends. With less money going to Ohioans who play the lottery and buy scratch-off tickets, more money would be available for education, the transition team contends.
There is another recommendation that we don't expect the governor to embrace with any enthusiasm, if at all, given his opposition to gambling. Strickland joined U.S. Sen. George V. Voinovich, R-Ohio, and other statewide officials in opposing the constitutional issue that would have permitted casino-style gambling in the state.
In exploring ways to increase participation in the lottery, the transition panel talks about attracting younger players.
Here are two questions posed in the report:
1. "Should new prize structures be offered that have appeal to a younger market?
"These could include plasma TVs, computers, digital media players, etc. While lottery profits are targeted solely to primary and secondary education, offering a game with a top prize that may even offer college tuition at an Ohio college or university might help to underscore the lottery's commitment to education."
2. "Can and should a system of playing the lottery via the Internet be utilized? Many young people will not leave the house to purchase a ticket, but may be apt to play if they could do so online?"
The Vindicator has long opposed expansion of gambling in Ohio, and we find the transition team's focus on young people misguided and dangerous.
We urge Gov. Strickland to make it clear that any reassessment of the Ohio lottery will not include an initiative that preys on the state's young.
We acknowledge the need to adequately fund primary and secondary education and to ensure that universities and colleges are turning out graduates who can complete in an ever-changing world. But we do not believe that the expansion of gambling in Ohio is the solution.