Talking Like a Tax Collector or a Social Guardian? The Use of Administrative Discourse by U.S. State Lottery Agencies

  • Étienne Charbonneau
Part of the Studies in Public Choice book series (SIPC, volume 15)


Aside from higher education, lotteries are probably the most important state product provided directly to the public. In the United States, revenues from lotteries finance directly one or a few socially desirable causes. Lotteries are depicted as a well-focused quest for increased revenues that also takes into account a liberal respect for consumer sovereignty. State lottery agencies have two goals: a main taxing goal and secondary societal welfare goals such as protecting compulsive gamblers and funding charitable or welfare programs. As such, lotteries are often advertised as a way to earn proceeds for some social cause (often Education). Analyzing the administrative discourse provides a window inside the balancing act of the two missions. The tax-collector/social guardian positions taken by the different U.S. state lottery agencies will be scrutinized. Efforts to understand the determinants of the ideological positions revealed by administrative discourse will be presented. In this chapter, administrative discourse will be used to estimate how state lottery agencies balance their dual missions. The results will shed light on the nature of state government and its bureaucratic apparatus.


Annual Report Truth Table Qualitative Comparative Analysis Content Analysis Method Fiscal Stress 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



I want to take this opportunity to thank Louis Imbeau, Jérôme Couture, and Morgan Southwood for their comments and suggestions. Needless to say, all remaining errors are mine.


  1. Alm, J., M. McKee, and M. Skidmore. 1993. Fiscal pressure, tax competition, and the introduction of State lottery. National Tax Journal, 46(4): 463–476.Google Scholar
  2. Anderson, C. and Imperia, G. 1992, The corporate annual report: A photo analysis of male and female portrayals, The Journal of Business Communications, 22 (2):113–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Borg, M. O., P. M. Mason, and S. L. Shapiro. 1993 The cross effects of lottery taxes on alternative state tax revenue, Public Finance Quarterly, 21: 123–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Brown, R. P. and J. C. Rork. 2005. Copycat gaming: A spatial analysis of State lottery structure. Regional Science and Urban Economics, 35: 795–807.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Clotfelter, C. T. and P. J. Cook. 1987. Implicit taxation in lottery finance. National Tax Journal, 40 (4):533–546.Google Scholar
  6. Clotfelter, C.T. and P.J. Cook 1989. Selling hope: State lotteries in America. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  7. Clotfelter, C.T. and P.J. Cook 1991 Lotteries in the real world. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 4 (3):227–232CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Comparative methods for the advancement of systematic cross-case analysis and small-n studies official website 2006., consulted on December 6th, 2006.
  9. Deboer, L. 1985 Administrative costs of State lotteries. National Tax Journal, 38 (4):479–488.Google Scholar
  10. Evans, M., W. McIntosh, et al. 2005. Recounting the courts? Toward A text-centered computational approach to understanding the dynamics of the judicial system. Annual Meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago, IL.Google Scholar
  11. Fink, S. C., A. C. Marco, and J. C. Rork. 2004. Lotto nothing? The budgetary impact of State lotteries. Applied Economics, 36: 2357–2367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Friedman, M. and L. J. Savage 1948. The Utility Analysis of Choices involving Risk. Journal of Political Economy, 56(4): 279–304.Google Scholar
  13. Garrett, T. A. and T. L. Marsh. 2002. The revenue impacts of cross-border lottery shopping in the presence of spatial autocorrelation. Regional Science and Urban Economics, 32: 501–519.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Giannetti, D. and M. Laver 2005. Policy positions and jobs in the government. European Journal of Political Research, 44: 91–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Goodman, R. 1995. The luck business the devastating consequences and broken promises of America’s gambling explosion. Free Press, New York.Google Scholar
  16. Hansen, A. 1995. The tax incidence of the Colorado State lottery instant game, Public Finance Quarterly, 23, 385–398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hersch, P. I. and G. S. Mcdougall 1989. Do people put their money where their votes are? The case of lottery tickets. Southern Economic Journal, 56 (1): 32–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hertzke, A.D. 1998. The theory of moral ecology. The Review of Politics, 60 (4): 629–659.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hines, R. D. 1988. Financial accounting in communicating reality, we construct reality. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 13 (3): 251–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hopwood, A. G. 1996. Introduction. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 21 (1):55–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Imbeau, L. M. 2005. Do they walk like they talk? Speeches from the throne and budget deficits in Ontario and Quebec. Annual meeting of the Canadian Political Science Association, London, Ontario, June.Google Scholar
  22. Jackson, R. 1994. Demand for lottery products in Massachusetts. The Journal of Consumer Affairs, 28 (2): 313–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Jensen, J. L. 2003. Policy diffusion through institutional legitimation: State lotteries. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 13 (4): 521–541.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Jones, M. 1996, Accounting narratives: An emerging trend. Management Accounting, April: 41–42.Google Scholar
  25. Kearney, M. S. 2005. State lotteries and consumer behavior. Journal of Public Economics, 89: 2269–2299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kritzinger, S., F. Cavatorta, and R.S. Chari. 2004. Continuity and change in party positions towards Europe in Italian parties: An examination of parties’ manifestos. Journal of European Public Policy, 11 (6): 954–974.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Laver, M., K. Benoit, and J. Garry 2003. Extracting policy positions from political texts using words as data. American Political Science Review, 97 (2): 311–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Livernois, J. 1987. The redistributive effects of lotteries: Evidence from Canada. Public Finance Quarterly, 15: 339–351.Google Scholar
  29. McConkey, W. C. and W. E. Warren. 1987. Psychographic and demographic profiles of State lottery purchasers. The Journal of Consumer Affairs, 21 (2): 314–327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. McGuire, K. T. and G. Vanberg 2005. Mapping the policies of the U.S. Supreme court: Data, opinions, and constitutional law. Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  31. Mikesell, J. L. 1994. State lottery and economic activity. National Tax Journal, 47 (1): 165–171.Google Scholar
  32. Neimark, M. 1983. How to use Content analysis in historical research. The Accounting Historians Notebook, 6 (2): 1–23.Google Scholar
  33. Ragin, C. 1987. The comparative method: Moving beyond qualitative and quantitative strategies, University of California Press, Berkeley, CA, 185p.Google Scholar
  34. Ragin, C. 2000. Fuzzy sets social science, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL, 352p.Google Scholar
  35. Rivenbark, W. C. and B. B. Rounsaville. 1996. The incidence of casino gaming taxes in Mississippi: Setting the stage. Public Administration Quarterly, 20 (2):129–142.Google Scholar
  36. Rubenstein, R. and B. Scafidi. 2002. Who pays and who benefits? Examining the distributional consequences of the Georgia lottery for education. National Tax Journal, 52 (2): 223–238.Google Scholar
  37. Szakmary, A. C. and C. M. Szakmary. 1995. State lotteries as a source of revenue: A re-examination. Southern Economic Journal, 61 (4): 1167–1181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Stanton, P. and S. John. 2002. Corporate annual reports: Research perspectives used. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 15 (4): 478–500.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Stranahan, H. and M. Borg. 1998a. Horizontal equity implications of the lottery tax. National Tax Journal, 51: 71–88.Google Scholar
  40. Stranahan, H. and M. Borg. 1998b. Separating the decisions of lottery expenditures and participation: A truncated tobit approach. Public Finance Review, 26: 99–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. 2007. Overview of BLS Statistics on Inflation and Consumer Spending., consulted April 26th, 2007.
  42. Vallen, G. K. 1993. Gaming in the U.S. – A ten-year comparison. The Cornell H.R.A. Quarterly , 34(6): 51–58.Google Scholar
  43. Van Lujik, H. and J. Smit. 1995. The moral profile of the gambling industry. A paper prepared for the First European Conference on Gaming and Policy Issues, Cambridge, UK, August 2nd–5th.Google Scholar
  44. Wohlenberg, E. H. 1992. Recent U.S. gambling legalization: A case study of lotteries. The Social Science Journal, 29(2): 167–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Public Affairs and AdministrationRutgers – The State University of New JerseNewarkUSA

Personalised recommendations