Over the opposition of two major gaming corporations, an Assembly committee voted 8-5 Thursday to let voters decide whether to legalize a state lottery.
All Democrats on the Assembly Constitutional Amendments Committee backed Assembly Joint Resolution 5, while all five Republicans opposed it.
Passage of the resolution in the committee is the first step in a long process before Nevada would join 42 other states in having a state lottery. The measure needs approval by both houses of the Legislature this year and again in 2009. Then voters in 2010 would decide whether to legalize a lottery, which has been prohibited since 1864 by the state constitution.
Since 1975, 24 previous attempts to let Nevada voters legalize a lottery have failed in the Legislature. Two years ago a similar resolution won overwhelming support in the Democrat-dominated Assembly and then was defeated by Republicans in the Senate Judiciary Committee. Members of that committee said they were concerned a lottery would compete with the gaming industry.
The 2007 Legislature has a similar party breakdown: Democrats have a 27-15 advantage in the Assembly and Republicans an 11-10 edge in the Senate.
Boyd Gaming and Station Casinos unveiled a study during Thursday's meeting that found a Nevada lottery would create 316 new jobs in the state, and lead to the elimination of 595 jobs in the hospitality industry, a net loss of 279 jobs.
Jeremy Aguero, the Applied Analysis researcher who authored the study, also said people with the lowest incomes are more likely to play lotteries.
"Lotteries have the worst odds of legalized gaming known to man," said Aguero, adding that the chanced of winning a lottery are about the same as being killed in a car accident. Aguero's study found that if someone purchased 50 California Super Lotto tickets each week, that person would win the jackpot once every 5,000 years.
Nonetheless, his research found that Nevada would receive about $48 million a year in profits from a state lottery.
Funds from winnings would be earmarked for purchases of textbooks, computers and other instructional materials in Nevada classrooms.
Assemblyman Marcus Conklin, D-Las Vegas, challenged Aguero's findings. He predicted people would be more willing to play a lottery because the profits would go for education.
"We can do better than the average on a lottery," Conklin said.
Assemblyman Harry Mortenson, chairman of the panel, said he voted against a lottery in 2003 but later learned his constituents overwhelmingly wanted one. He cited a Review-Journal poll that found 73 percent of residents want a state lottery.
"My job is to represent my people, my constituents," said Mortenson, D-Las Vegas.
Assemblyman Ruben Kihuen, D-Las Vegas, said, "I heard it every day on the campaign trail."
But Assemblyman Chad Christensen, R-Las Vegas, said he has never heard any of his constituents call for a state lottery.
During the hearing, school principals and the Nevada State Education Association called for passage of the resolution, saying a lottery could provide additional money for education.
But Assemblyman James Settelmeyer, R-Gardnerville, complained that they were saying Nevada needs more money for education while not giving reasons for legalizing a state lottery. Settelmeyer cited reports that showed the poor in lottery states spend far more of their income on lotteries than those who are better off.
"Isn't there a better way of generating revenue than targeting the poor?" he asked.
Eagle Forum President Janine Hansen said a lottery would lead to more gambling addiction and the dissolution of families.
She said one reason that Utah students perform better academically than Nevada students is because of a higher rate of Nevada families are broken up because of gaming problems. There is no legal gambling in Utah.
"We are really gambling on our children's future with a lottery," Hansen said.
Quote: Originally posted by LOTTOMIKE on Mar 17, 2007
the casinos will not let this happen.they don't want those millions going somewhere else.
It's a good thing for those legislators that passed this proposal that it's 2007 and not 1967 (or so) - more than a few of them would probably be moving (rather involuntarily. I'm afraid) into new underground "apartments" in the nearby desert...
Nevada already has Las Vegas, so big deal. There's not much else to do there. Anyway finally you can go at least a few days or more without seeing yet another story about how NC just put a lottery terminal in the Quickie Mart in some town you never heard of...hopefully if NV gets its Lottery the only time you'll hear about it is if someone wins a jackpot or steals something there. And hopefully NV isn't joining PB or MM and thus causing either to add YET MORE #&$!%* balls to make it that much harder to win everywhere else and screw up my algorithms again.
The casino moguls are the ones that also PAY out the ying yang for taxes that DO go to support the education system there. Nevada is unique in how it gains revenue, most of it does come from the gaming industry. Adding a Lottery system means having to hire an outside source to run the game ( revenue loss at startup) having to market it ( revenue loss) and having folks find interest in it should it pass legislation.
I am neither for or against this proposal . What does need to be considered is the impact of adding yet another revenue muncher .
Quote: Originally posted by TheGameGrl on Mar 17, 2007
The casino moguls are the ones that also PAY out the ying yang for taxes that DO go to support the education system there. Nevada is unique in how it gains revenue, most of it does come from the gaming industry. Adding a Lottery system means having to hire an outside source to run the game ( revenue loss at startup) having to market it ( revenue loss) and having folks find interest in it should it pass legislation.
I am neither for or against this proposal . What does need to be considered is the impact of adding yet another revenue muncher .
Read the OP. One of the politicians said he hears "lottery" wherever he goes. The marketing is coming from the people who want to play.
As for the casino "moguls" (which are no longer individuals but corporations) paying out the ying yang for taxes to support the education system there, going by that Nevada should have the best schools, the best of everything.
The gambling profits, and the room tax, and the landing tax (which are part of the price of a plane ticket) should indeed be supporting an excellent education system.
Vegas alone should have "the best of everything". It simply doesn't.
The casinos want it all, always have.
The closest place to Las Vegas to play the lottery is a convenience store/ fuel mart owned by one of the casinos on the Cal. border. (Primm, or whatever the name is now.) When they opened the casino they opened a convenience mart, so they could sell California lottery tickets. That in itself is interesting, because at the time the Cal. law was that to sell lotto you had to be in business at that location for five years. They were selling tickets on day one. Imagine that.
Vegas casinos have even complained about how many locals go to Cal. to play lotto. California's answer was, "Hey, there's plenty of So. Cal money going to your casinos, shut up about the lotto."
Quote: Originally posted by LckyLary on Mar 17, 2007
Nevada already has Las Vegas, so big deal. There's not much else to do there. Anyway finally you can go at least a few days or more without seeing yet another story about how NC just put a lottery terminal in the Quickie Mart in some town you never heard of...hopefully if NV gets its Lottery the only time you'll hear about it is if someone wins a jackpot or steals something there. And hopefully NV isn't joining PB or MM and thus causing either to add YET MORE #&$!%* balls to make it that much harder to win everywhere else and screw up my algorithms again.
If Nevada is creating a lottery it would be in their best interests to join the Powerball group. To be honest, I don't know if there would really be a point to them selling any games beyond the 4 multi-state Powerball family of games (other than perhaps a Pick 3 and 4 game). Maybe they could even sell the 3 state Win for Life game.
Don't forget about the Nevada Numbers games sold in the Keno rooms at various casinos. If that were more widely available perhaps Nevada wouldn't need to be going through this.
Quote: Originally posted by Coin Toss on Mar 17, 2007
"Isn't there a better way of generating revenue than targeting the poor?" he asked.
Eagle Forum President Janine Hansen said a lottery would lead to more gambling addiction and the dissolution of families."
Lets' see, targeting the poor, leading to more gambling addiction.
Video poker had been called "electronic morphine".
Nevada's paranoia about a lottery is ridiculous. It just tranlates into the greed of the casino owners, they want it all.
I don't get it. Nevada doesn't even have that many people in terms of population. Therefore they don't have a glut of students. Now they already get millions and millions from the casinos in tax.
So Nevada doesn't need hundreds of millions for education, and they already get hundreds of millions from the casiinos.
What are they doing with all that money that they suddenly feel they need to start a lottery? If they raised the tax on the casinos instead by one-half a percent, they'd have the money they want, plus some !
This is a good idea...if the minimum purchase age turns out to be 18. If not I hope it gets voted down, Nevada's young adults don't need another slap in the face, especially in a time of war.
I believe, adding lottery to Nevada will not take profits from the casinos...But what Nevada needs to do is Not join Powerball/MegaMillions...It nees to have its own lotto like Florida an Texas....An I wish they will listen to me...They shoul not have a lottery like WVa Cash25, Texas's Two steps or Ky's CashBall for this games will indee take players away from the casinos...They do not need and should not have a regular pick5....The perfect pick5 game for Nevada is Fla's MegaMoney, an it should pay the same as Fla's...It will also be nice/perfect if casinos sold lottery tickets...I would also propose they put a lotto exactly like California's Super Lotto Plus (1-49) & (1-27)....IF they have a bonus ball on their lotto it will attract players...You want to attract players for the lotto but not petty winnings because it will then it will take profit from casinos....And i am glad Nevada is getting lottery because then LP is going to experience heavy traffic...You see the wrong lotto and it will spook players....And that's why I say it shoul be FLa MegaMoney....That's my personal opinion...But i been told that what attract players are the high jackpots and the absence of Powerball/megaillions may not attract lots of players...An perhaps Nevada could have all 3 games [pick5, pick6 an PB/mm) but so far that style is reserve for states with large population....
"Laura Simpson from Great Lakes, Illinois deserves to be rich...." "She is so rare....."
I think the casinos would object more to the pick 3/4 than Powerball. Slots make the most money for casino's and almost all large casino's have keno. There really are no jackpot type games other than the Megabucks slots.
For Nevada to join Powerball (or Mega) (if they do) in and of itself, won't make a big difference other than sometimes the winner will be from Nevada. You'd have more money added but more sets of numbers in play but it would approximately balance out... but jackpots would be won slightly more often making it harder to get to the really big levels and that might cause Powerball (or Mega) to add more numbers, and I'd rather they left the matrix alone so that the overall odds stayed the same (especially for smaller prizes). People would get excited about high jackpots but then turned off because they can't seem to get more than 1 or 2 numbers on an entire 5-line ticket.
Quote: Originally posted by pumpi76 on Mar 18, 2007
I believe, adding lottery to Nevada will not take profits from the casinos...But what Nevada needs to do is Not join Powerball/MegaMillions...It nees to have its own lotto like Florida an Texas....An I wish they will listen to me...They shoul not have a lottery like WVa Cash25, Texas's Two steps or Ky's CashBall for this games will indee take players away from the casinos...They do not need and should not have a regular pick5....The perfect pick5 game for Nevada is Fla's MegaMoney, an it should pay the same as Fla's...It will also be nice/perfect if casinos sold lottery tickets...I would also propose they put a lotto exactly like California's Super Lotto Plus (1-49) & (1-27)....IF they have a bonus ball on their lotto it will attract players...You want to attract players for the lotto but not petty winnings because it will then it will take profit from casinos....And i am glad Nevada is getting lottery because then LP is going to experience heavy traffic...You see the wrong lotto and it will spook players....And that's why I say it shoul be FLa MegaMoney....That's my personal opinion...But i been told that what attract players are the high jackpots and the absence of Powerball/megaillions may not attract lots of players...An perhaps Nevada could have all 3 games [pick5, pick6 an PB/mm) but so far that style is reserve for states with large population....
"Laura Simpson from Great Lakes, Illinois deserves to be rich...." "She is so rare....."
Completely disagree. Nevada needs Powerball to make its lottery viable. Nevada Lotto = Florida Lotto? I doubt that'd fly considering the population of the state alone. I also doubt the tourists will pay much attention to a lottery there anyway, because that's not why they are there. However, Californians and Utans (is that what they're called?) will come to Nevada to play Powerball. Remember, the casinos run the Nevada Numbers game and putting something in direct competition to that is probably unnecessary (although I'd like to see its presense expanded beyond Keno lobbies).
Quote: Originally posted by dvdiva on Mar 18, 2007
I think the casinos would object more to the pick 3/4 than Powerball. Slots make the most money for casino's and almost all large casino's have keno. There really are no jackpot type games other than the Megabucks slots.
I definately agree...And what they should definately not put is a game like Ma's Number game....But a state without pick3/pick4, i don't know of a state like that...I always felt they should eliminate pick3/pick4, because is a really strong sucker and it encourages players to gamble (unless they were putting it easier but that will never happen)....Also i find a big disadvantage on having a powerball: the states with the most population will have better chances of winning the PowerBall/MM jackpot, so is not really creating millionaires for your state....
"Laura Simpson from Great Lakes, Illinois deserves to be rich...." "She is so rare...."
"Isn't there a better way of generating revenue than targeting the poor?" he asked.
Eagle Forum President Janine Hansen said a lottery would lead to more gambling addiction and the dissolution of families."
Lets' see, targeting the poor, leading to more gambling addiction.
Video poker had been called "electronic morphine".
Nevada's paranoia about a lottery is ridiculous. It just tranlates into the greed of the casino owners, they want it all.
the casinos will not let this happen.they don't want those millions going somewhere else.
It's a good thing for those legislators that passed this proposal that it's 2007 and not 1967 (or so) - more than a few of them would probably be moving (rather involuntarily. I'm afraid) into new underground "apartments" in the nearby desert...
Nevada already has Las Vegas, so big deal. There's not much else to do there. Anyway finally you can go at least a few days or more without seeing yet another story about how NC just put a lottery terminal in the Quickie Mart in some town you never heard of...hopefully if NV gets its Lottery the only time you'll hear about it is if someone wins a jackpot or steals something there. And hopefully NV isn't joining PB or MM and thus causing either to add YET MORE #&$!%* balls to make it that much harder to win everywhere else and screw up my algorithms again.
The casino moguls are the ones that also PAY out the ying yang for taxes that DO go to support the education system there. Nevada is unique in how it gains revenue, most of it does come from the gaming industry. Adding a Lottery system means having to hire an outside source to run the game ( revenue loss at startup) having to market it ( revenue loss) and having folks find interest in it should it pass legislation.
I am neither for or against this proposal . What does need to be considered is the impact of adding yet another revenue muncher .
Read the OP. One of the politicians said he hears "lottery" wherever he goes. The marketing is coming from the people who want to play.
As for the casino "moguls" (which are no longer individuals but corporations) paying out the ying yang for taxes to support the education system there, going by that Nevada should have the best schools, the best of everything.
The gambling profits, and the room tax, and the landing tax (which are part of the price of a plane ticket) should indeed be supporting an excellent education system.
Vegas alone should have "the best of everything". It simply doesn't.
The casinos want it all, always have.
The closest place to Las Vegas to play the lottery is a convenience store/ fuel mart owned by one of the casinos on the Cal. border. (Primm, or whatever the name is now.) When they opened the casino they opened a convenience mart, so they could sell California lottery tickets. That in itself is interesting, because at the time the Cal. law was that to sell lotto you had to be in business at that location for five years. They were selling tickets on day one. Imagine that.
Vegas casinos have even complained about how many locals go to Cal. to play lotto. California's answer was, "Hey, there's plenty of So. Cal money going to your casinos, shut up about the lotto."
PS
I lived in Vegas from 1977 - 1993.
If Nevada is creating a lottery it would be in their best interests to join the Powerball group. To be honest, I don't know if there would really be a point to them selling any games beyond the 4 multi-state Powerball family of games (other than perhaps a Pick 3 and 4 game). Maybe they could even sell the 3 state Win for Life game.
Don't forget about the Nevada Numbers games sold in the Keno rooms at various casinos. If that were more widely available perhaps Nevada wouldn't need to be going through this.
I don't get it. Nevada doesn't even have that many people in terms of population. Therefore they don't have a glut of students. Now they already get millions and millions from the casinos in tax.
So Nevada doesn't need hundreds of millions for education, and they already get hundreds of millions from the casiinos.
What are they doing with all that money that they suddenly feel they need to start a lottery? If they raised the tax on the casinos instead by one-half a percent, they'd have the money they want, plus some !
This is a good idea...if the minimum purchase age turns out to be 18. If not I hope it gets voted down, Nevada's young adults don't need another slap in the face, especially in a time of war.
I believe, adding lottery to Nevada will not take profits from the casinos...But what Nevada needs to do is Not join Powerball/MegaMillions...It nees to have its own lotto like Florida an Texas....An I wish they will listen to me...They shoul not have a lottery like WVa Cash25, Texas's Two steps or Ky's CashBall for this games will indee take players away from the casinos...They do not need and should not have a regular pick5....The perfect pick5 game for Nevada is Fla's MegaMoney, an it should pay the same as Fla's...It will also be nice/perfect if casinos sold lottery tickets...I would also propose they put a lotto exactly like California's Super Lotto Plus (1-49) & (1-27)....IF they have a bonus ball on their lotto it will attract players...You want to attract players for the lotto but not petty winnings because it will then it will take profit from casinos....And i am glad Nevada is getting lottery because then LP is going to experience heavy traffic...You see the wrong lotto and it will spook players....And that's why I say it shoul be FLa MegaMoney....That's my personal opinion...But i been told that what attract players are the high jackpots and the absence of Powerball/megaillions may not attract lots of players...An perhaps Nevada could have all 3 games [pick5, pick6 an PB/mm) but so far that style is reserve for states with large population....
"Laura Simpson from Great Lakes, Illinois deserves to be rich...." "She is so rare....."
I think the casinos would object more to the pick 3/4 than Powerball. Slots make the most money for casino's and almost all large casino's have keno. There really are no jackpot type games other than the Megabucks slots.
For Nevada to join Powerball (or Mega) (if they do) in and of itself, won't make a big difference other than sometimes the winner will be from Nevada. You'd have more money added but more sets of numbers in play but it would approximately balance out... but jackpots would be won slightly more often making it harder to get to the really big levels and that might cause Powerball (or Mega) to add more numbers, and I'd rather they left the matrix alone so that the overall odds stayed the same (especially for smaller prizes). People would get excited about high jackpots but then turned off because they can't seem to get more than 1 or 2 numbers on an entire 5-line ticket.
Completely disagree. Nevada needs Powerball to make its lottery viable. Nevada Lotto = Florida Lotto? I doubt that'd fly considering the population of the state alone. I also doubt the tourists will pay much attention to a lottery there anyway, because that's not why they are there. However, Californians and Utans (is that what they're called?) will come to Nevada to play Powerball. Remember, the casinos run the Nevada Numbers game and putting something in direct competition to that is probably unnecessary (although I'd like to see its presense expanded beyond Keno lobbies).
I definately agree...And what they should definately not put is a game like Ma's Number game....But a state without pick3/pick4, i don't know of a state like that...I always felt they should eliminate pick3/pick4, because is a really strong sucker and it encourages players to gamble (unless they were putting it easier but that will never happen)....Also i find a big disadvantage on having a powerball: the states with the most population will have better chances of winning the PowerBall/MM jackpot, so is not really creating millionaires for your state....
"Laura Simpson from Great Lakes, Illinois deserves to be rich...." "She is so rare...."