Lottery Reaches Goal

[marc]

The Oklahoma Lottery has made its goal of raising $65 million for education. The total lottery sales for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2006 was about $207 million. The lottery didn't start until October 2005, so the ambitious one-year goal was actually  achieved in a little over eight months (262 days).

There were many who said the goal would never be reached. Some on talk radio will continue to deny it even after it has happened. There is much more truth in the Tulsa World than there is on local talk radio, in my opinion.

Of course the second year of the lottery may not do as well. State lotteries generally do well the first year or two, then there is a drop as the novelty wears off.

http://www.tulsaworld.com/NewsStory.asp?ID=060717_Ne_A1_Lotte2299

[Townsend]

http://www.ktul.com/story/16034562/oklahoma-lottery-honored-for-financial-reporting?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

OKLAHOMA CITY (AP) - The Oklahoma lottery is being honored for its financial reporting.

The state Lottery Commission announced Monday the Government Finance Officers Association has awarded the lottery a certificate of excellence for its comprehensive annual financial report.

The certificate is the highest form of recognition in the area of governmental accounting and financial reporting.

The organization cites the lottery's "spirit of full disclosure" for its clearly-written annual financial report. This is the fifth straight year the lottery has been cited by the group.

The Government Finance Officers Association is a nonprofit professional association that serves 17,500 government finance professionals.

The Oklahoma lottery has raised more than $436 million for education since 2005.

So where would education funding be if we didn't have the lottery?

[heironymouspasparagus]

http://www.ktul.com/story/16034562/oklahoma-lottery-honored-for-financial-reporting?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter


So where would education funding be if we didn't have the lottery?

About the same - poor.  They just shifted stuff that would have gone to education back to general fund so they could squander it somewhere.

[guido911]

http://www.ktul.com/story/16034562/oklahoma-lottery-honored-for-financial-reporting?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter


So where would education funding be if we didn't have the lottery?

How do we stack up against other states' education statistics today vs. pre-lottery?

[Townsend]

About the same - poor.  They just shifted stuff that would have gone to education back to general fund so they could squander it somewhere.

That's kind of what it feels like to me but I don't have the proof.

[heironymouspasparagus]

How do we stack up against other states' education statistics today vs. pre-lottery?

Haven't seen much lately, but I remember a few years ago, something about Georgia results - they had the same kind of legislature we have - the worst money can buy - and got same results.  All the new money that went to education was taken back from previous allocations into general fund, then squandered elsewhere.

It NEVER is an adder to education - it replaces money from other sources.

[cannon_fodder]

I've wanted to look into this for some time.  I tried to spend time over lunch but couldn't get the job done.  Here is what I found:

1) Oklahoma is 49th in per-student funding in edcuation:
http://www.news9.com/global/story.asp?s=12514885

2) There are dozens of ways to track education spending.  By Department.  By Cabinet appropriations.  With or without "higher education".  State only, or State + local.  I decided to do strate Department of Education budget, so here it is by year:

(In billions of dollars)

2011 $3.45
2010 $3.18
2009 $3.26
2008 $3.12
2007 $2.95
2006 $2.74
2005 $2.6
2004 $2.45
2003 $2.3
2002 $2.34
2001 $2.34

The lottery began "contributing to education" in 2006.  The lottery claims "in excess of $196 million and at other times claims $436 million towards education in Oklahoma.  This is to represent 45% of "funds raised."  Lottery money is thrown into an education "general fund" so it cannot be tracked specifically (as in X from lottery, X from appropriations).

Adjusted for inflation using the CPI, $3.18B in 2010 is equal to $2.57B in 2001.  That's a real rise of some 10%, which is probably offset by a greater number of students in Oklahoma schools. 

I ran out of time to figure it all out, but while there is more spending, I'm not sure it has effectively increased the per-pupil funding levels.  And I am not comfortable saying that the lottery money has been in excess of anything else.  Frankly, if it raises less than $100mil per year it is a minority funding source anyway.

[heironymouspasparagus]

I've wanted to look into this for some time.  I tried to spend time over lunch but couldn't get the job done.  Here is what I found:

1) Oklahoma is 49th in per-student funding in edcuation:
http://www.news9.com/global/story.asp?s=12514885

Point 1 pretty much covers the topic - it is a shame and a disgrace for us to be 49th.

And just another reason we are SOOOOO attractive to outsiders...this is on the list of evaluation items (like roads, turnpikes, other infrastructure.)

[Conan71]

I've wanted to look into this for some time.  I tried to spend time over lunch but couldn't get the job done.  Here is what I found:

1) Oklahoma is 49th in per-student funding in edcuation:
http://www.news9.com/global/story.asp?s=12514885

2) There are dozens of ways to track education spending.  By Department.  By Cabinet appropriations.  With or without "higher education".  State only, or State + local.  I decided to do strate Department of Education budget, so here it is by year:

(In billions of dollars)

2011 $3.45
2010 $3.18
2009 $3.26
2008 $3.12
2007 $2.95
2006 $2.74
2005 $2.6
2004 $2.45
2003 $2.3
2002 $2.34
2001 $2.34

The lottery began "contributing to education" in 2006.  The lottery claims "in excess of $196 million and at other times claims $436 million towards education in Oklahoma.  This is to represent 45% of "funds raised."  Lottery money is thrown into an education "general fund" so it cannot be tracked specifically (as in X from lottery, X from appropriations).

Adjusted for inflation using the CPI, $3.18B in 2010 is equal to $2.57B in 2001.  That's a real rise of some 10%, which is probably offset by a greater number of students in Oklahoma schools. 

I ran out of time to figure it all out, but while there is more spending, I'm not sure it has effectively increased the per-pupil funding levels.  And I am not comfortable saying that the lottery money has been in excess of anything else.  Frankly, if it raises less than $100mil per year it is a minority funding source anyway.

I think we pulled other traditional funding methods for education when we voted in the lottery instead of adding lottery receipts to the existing funding structure.

[Red Arrow]

I think we pulled other traditional funding methods for education when we voted in the lottery instead of adding lottery receipts to the existing funding structure.

I believe we did that several years before that when we voted for some proposition that I don't remember the number of which was supposed to end all of our education funding problems.  All of the "new money" was to be spent on education.  The concept of taking existing money being spent on education and using it somewhere else was kept hush-hush.

[heironymouspasparagus]

I believe we did that several years before that when we voted for some proposition that I don't remember the number of which was supposed to end all of our education funding problems.  All of the "new money" was to be spent on education.  The concept of taking existing money being spent on education and using it somewhere else was kept hush-hush.

Is 1017 the one you are thinking of?

We did similar stuff with betting on horse racing, too.

It's all a shell game to the clowns and jokers in the OK legislature.

[Red Arrow]

Is 1017 the one you are thinking of?

Probably, the number sounds familiar.

Just remember... "Do it for the kids"

[Conan71]

I believe we did that several years before that when we voted for some proposition that I don't remember the number of which was supposed to end all of our education funding problems.  All of the "new money" was to be spent on education.  The concept of taking existing money being spent on education and using it somewhere else was kept hush-hush.

I think that was HB-1017 which did make dramatic funding increases.

[cannon_fodder]

1) Oklahoma is 49th in per-student funding in edcuation:
http://www.news9.com/global/story.asp?s=12514885

As an indictment of our education system I misspelled the word "education" and no one noticed.  Yeah, I did that on purpose.  I'm so clever.

[Red Arrow]

As an indictment of our education system I misspelled the word "education" and no one noticed.  Yeah, I did that on purpose.  I'm so clever.

I intentionally ignored your error in honor of all the terrible spelling and grammar that frequents this forum.