The lottery offers a chance to imagine a future where you are rich, and the price tag is just a few bucks. For many, it is harmless fun. But for others, it is a disguised tax on people least able to afford it. Numerous studies have found that those with low incomes play a disproportionate share of lotteries and other forms of gambling. Critics claim that promoting gambling and offering prizes in unequal sizes promote addictive behavior and are a form of regressive taxation.
In the modern era of state-sponsored lotteries, which began with New Hampshire’s establishment of one in 1964, the development of a state lottery generally follows a familiar pattern: the state legislates its own monopoly; establishes a government agency or public corporation to run it; starts with a modest number of relatively simple games; and, driven by pressure to increase revenues, progressively expands the lottery’s size and complexity.
State-sponsored lotteries are also frequently criticized for the advertising strategies used to encourage ticket purchases. Because state officials are focused on maximizing revenue, they often run at cross-purposes with their responsibility to protect the public welfare. State officials also face a dilemma because they must make decisions about the lotteries in piecemeal fashion, and the state’s overall public policy is usually not taken into account at all. The result is that the evolution of state lotteries can take on an almost independent life of its own, with few, if any, consistent public-policy implications.