The odds might favor a shake-up
PETER CALLAGHAN; THE NEWS TRIBUNE
How many times can one state agency embarrass the boss before the boss decides it’s once too many?
The agency is the Washington State Lottery, which has the dubious task of maximizing revenue “consonant with the dignity of the state and the general welfare of the people.”
The lottery does a lot better with the maximizing part than the dignity of the state part. Which is why an appointed board oversees the staff, to temper the marketers’ zeal with a little common sense.
It should happen but it doesn’t.
Let’s go back a little over two years ago, while the Legislature was discussing a bill to raise the gambling age from 18 to 21. The lottery staff didn’t actually oppose the bill. But it reminded the lawmakers that young adults produce nearly $5 million in state revenue by playing lottery games.
But at the same time the lottery staff had just produced a business plan that termed 18-, 19- and 20-year-olds “a key market the lottery intends to pursue” and said this age group “represents the players of the future.”
Trouble was, advertising aimed at 18-, 19- and 20-year-olds was likely to appeal to kids as well. And as unseemly as it is for the state to benefit from gambling, it looked even worse for it to appear to be trying to hook kids.
I wrote a column about the plan, and the next day Gov. Chris Gregoire wrote a letter to the lottery director telling him to cut it out.
“Because there may be little to no difference between marketing and advertising strategies directed at teenagers under 18, and those 18 and 19 years old, I ask that you refrain from using tools that entice those young adults to play,” Gregoire wrote Christopher Liu on Feb. 10, 2006.
“My concern is that, by following such a path, we would increase the likelihood of younger teenagers becoming involved in gambling at an age when they do not fully understand the risks involved,” Gregoire wrote.
Did the lottery staff pay attention? Fast forward two years and take a look at a scratch ticket game that was on the market until last week. In a cross-promotional deal with Hershey’s, gamblers could buy tickets that looked like candy wrappers. A player could scratch the tops off Reese’s Peanut Butter Cups or Milk Duds or Jolly Ranchers. They could find their numbers under some red Twizzlers as well.
Certainly adults like these candies. But given all of the scratch games out there, why would the lottery join up with a company that spends millions of dollars marketing its products to kids?
That’s what Shirley Jackson thought when she wrote the governor in May to complain. Her letter was forwarded to Liu, who sent this response in defense of the games:
“Retailers find it helpful when Lottery products can be paired with other similar products associated with fun or entertainment such as candy products and quick play games which are often in a similar price range,” he wrote. “This is why such products are merchandised accordingly and tickets are designed with themes that allow for companion marketing by retailers.
“Thank you for the time and effort you have made to contact us with your thoughts,” Liu concluded. “We appreciate your inquiry and your interest in Washington’s Lottery.”
Jackson sent an e-mail back that read, in part, “I find it difficult to believe that the Lottery doesn’t intend to market to our kids when you market Jolly Rancher scratch tickets. Shame on you.”
I heard about the games late last week from state Rep. Dan Roach, R-Bonney Lake. He wondered why the lottery was ignoring the direction of the governor.
“The state is grooming kids to be habitual gamblers,” Roach said.
I showed the games to Gregoire’s legislative liaison, Marty Brown, on Thursday. Within an hour, he said the lottery would take the games off the market.
A lottery spokeswoman now calls the deal with Hershey’s “a mistake.”
“There was concern that possibly minors could be attracted to it,” said Jacque Coe. “If there’s any confusion about who might be looking at it, it’s a mistake.”
About 600,000 of the original 1.9 million tickets were unsold when the game was withdrawn.
Why were games that were defended just two weeks ago suddenly a mistake? And what do the lottery commissioners do when the staff brings them such mistakes?
Gregoire appoints the commissioners. Gregoire appoints the lottery director. They’ve now embarrassed her twice on the same issue. Will they all get yet another chance before she decides to scratch them?
Peter Callaghan: 253-597-8657
peter.callaghan@thenewstribune.com">
peter.callaghan@thenewstribune.com
blogs.thenewstribune.com/politics
