Talking Like a Tax Collector or a Social Guardian? The Use of Administrative Discourse by U.S. State Lottery Agencies
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.
KeywordsAnnual Report Truth Table Qualitative Comparative Analysis Content Analysis Method Fiscal Stress
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.
- 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
- Clotfelter, C. T. and P. J. Cook. 1987. Implicit taxation in lottery finance. National Tax Journal, 40 (4):533–546.Google Scholar
- Clotfelter, C.T. and P.J. Cook 1989. Selling hope: State lotteries in America. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
- Comparative methods for the advancement of systematic cross-case analysis and small-n studies official website 2006. http://www.compasss.org/, consulted on December 6th, 2006.
- Deboer, L. 1985 Administrative costs of State lotteries. National Tax Journal, 38 (4):479–488.Google Scholar
- 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
- Friedman, M. and L. J. Savage 1948. The Utility Analysis of Choices involving Risk. Journal of Political Economy, 56(4): 279–304.Google Scholar
- Goodman, R. 1995. The luck business the devastating consequences and broken promises of America’s gambling explosion. Free Press, New York.Google Scholar
- 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
- Jones, M. 1996, Accounting narratives: An emerging trend. Management Accounting, April: 41–42.Google Scholar
- Livernois, J. 1987. The redistributive effects of lotteries: Evidence from Canada. Public Finance Quarterly, 15: 339–351.Google Scholar
- 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
- Mikesell, J. L. 1994. State lottery and economic activity. National Tax Journal, 47 (1): 165–171.Google Scholar
- Neimark, M. 1983. How to use Content analysis in historical research. The Accounting Historians Notebook, 6 (2): 1–23.Google Scholar
- Ragin, C. 1987. The comparative method: Moving beyond qualitative and quantitative strategies, University of California Press, Berkeley, CA, 185p.Google Scholar
- Ragin, C. 2000. Fuzzy sets social science, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL, 352p.Google Scholar
- 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
- 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
- Stranahan, H. and M. Borg. 1998a. Horizontal equity implications of the lottery tax. National Tax Journal, 51: 71–88.Google Scholar
- U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. 2007. Overview of BLS Statistics on Inflation and Consumer Spending. http://www.bls.gov/bls/inflation.htm, consulted April 26th, 2007.
- 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
- 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