But a move in that direction would require much care to assure the proper checks and balances are in place and that enough authority rests on the public side of the coin.
Ms. Taylor’s office did a thoughtful “performance audit” of the lottery. It mostly compliments lottery officials on their management. Yet it details several reasons why a corporate-style structure might make more sense. The lottery, it says, should operate more like a company and less like a government agency.
The lottery today follows the same rules as other state agencies for hiring, purchasing and rule-making. Some of those practices can be expensive and are rare in corporations.
Under the current setup, the lottery also is a political animal. The report notes that the executive director, in practice, takes cues from the governor, not the lottery commission. The lottery is affected, for instance, when tough times bring across-the-board administrative cuts to state agencies. But cuts to its staff and advertising budgets can actually cut into profits.
Ms. Taylor cites other states that have started up new lotteries or converted to the quasi-public design, saying the model lets the lottery focus on its business rather than politics and to react more nimbly to circumstances in changing, say, what games it will offer. Some other states have reported higher profits after a switch.
Still, figuring out where to draw the lines between the controls expected for government entities and a degree of corporate freedom isn’t easy.
The state’s auditors go out of their way to say lottery meetings should be open and documents should be subject to state public-records law if the state goes in the corporate direction. Fine.
But should the lottery be allowed to make multimillion-dollar purchases without bidding? Does the governor or legislature get routine veto power over day-to-day decisions?
One surefire way to make better profits is to target ads to those who play often. But frequent players are often poor. Preying on them, or people with gambling addictions, is not something government should be doing. For that reason, the lottery does not engage in target marketing. Administrators working under a corporate model could decide differently.
The important question is: Does the lottery, which auditors say is well run and highly profitable, need an overhaul?
The quasi-public lottery is in vogue today. Since 1993, 11 states have begun new lotteries. All but two of them are quasi-public, while two other states have converted from traditionally public lotteries.
State-sponsored gambling isn’t the worthiest public policy, but Ohio is moving in the direction of more gaming, not less. If the state is determined to expand the lottery, then a sensible, corporate-style operation — with the right controls — deserves a look.
— Cox News Service