As many ETSU students are fairly aware, the state of higher education in Tennessee is one of emergency.
With the state funding higher education at 85.5 percent of the rate it did in 1990, students have had to pay more of their college bills due to the higher costs. For example, tuition has increased at ETSU by 17 percent in the last two years alone.
Administration costs have had to be capped, resulting in hiring freezes, increasing class sizes or the elimination of whole class sections, and the refusal of teacher pay raises, among other consequences.
Said in a previous interiew with President Stanton, the lack of adequate funding for higher education “is becoming seen as a major problem.” Regardless of where revenue comes from, however, Stanton insists that education come before roads and prisons in the state budget.
“Suppose there are never anymore revenue dollars . you can still reprioritize education,” Stanton said. “At some point (you must) reprioritize education up the ladder. There’d be a whole lot less prison cells needed if we had more people getting an education.”
Under the current structure, Tennessee lags behind the nation in funding for higher education, ranking in the bottom five.
That school funding is relatively low gives Tennessee a black eye, Stanton said.
To the rest of the nation “it appears that education is not valued” in Tennessee. That image, along with tuition increases, has spurned a decrease in enrollment, he said.
Enrollment has fallen from 10,821 graduate and undergraduate students in fall 2000 to an estimated 10,087 in spring 2001, and has decreased year-to-year since fall 1998.
Legislators in Nashville may have a solution in the wings. On Wednesday, Feb. 7, the Tennessee Senate passed a resolution, 22-11, calling for citizens to be allowed a referendum on the lottery ban in 2002.
That resolution in part states “the net proceeds of the lottery’s revenues are allocated to provide financial assistance to citizens of this state to enable such citizens to attend post-secondary educational institutions located within this state.”
“We have worked hard to give the people this decision,” said State Representative Mike Kernell (D-Memphis), a primary sponsor of the resolution in the House. “Education is one of the most crucial issues we face here, and helping our children through college is something I hope will have a positive impact on every Tennessee family.”
According to an Estimated Fiscal Impact study conducted for the Tennessee House of Representatives, the lottery is expected to generate a “net increase in state revenues in excess of $200,000,000.”
That is two million more to be used on college scholarships, K-12 school construction projects, early learning and after-school projects. The lottery legislation states that the additional revenue will be used to “supplement, not supplant” the State’s spending on education.
In addition, many lottery enthusiasts point to Georgia as an example of a successful lottery. In Georgia, students who maintain a “B” average through high school get their college paid for by the state through the Hope Scholar-ship.
Furthermore, many proponents of the lottery argue that state money goes to surrounding states when the people go to play in Georgia or Virginia, for example. That adds up to lost revenue that could be going to Tennessee schools and other government functions. But not everyone is convinced that a lottery is the best thing for Tennessee.
Senator Tommy Haun, (R- Greenville), says that “the lottery is not a panacea and will not solve the budget problems facing this state” and that “lotteries have a darker side.”
Many opponents argue that a lottery is a form of a regressive tax and exploits the poor.
Haun agrees. “The lottery is a burden on the people who can afford the lottery the least, the poor, ” he said.
Numerous studies have shown a correlation between income and lottery play. For example, a University of Louisville study showed that Kentuckians with annual incomes less than $15,000 spent $9.23 per week on lottery tickets, while those earning above $35,000 spent only $7.36.
In addition, many opponents believe that the role of the government should not be in the role to be sanctioning gambling.
Harvard Professor of Govern-ment Michael J. Sandel writes in an article by Ronald Reno, “With states hooked on lottery money, they have no choice but to continue to bombard their citizens, especially the most vulnerable ones, with a message at odds with the ethic of work, sacrifice, and moral responsibility that substains democratic life.
“This civil corruption is the gravest harm that lotteries bring,” Tennessee House Represent-ative David Davis (R-Johnson City) insists. “The state should not be in the gambling business. It is a tax on our poorest citizens.”
Furthermore, lotteries and other forms of gambling cost the state in the form of increased criminal justice, social-welfare and other costs. Suicide and drug and alcohol addiction are common among compulsive gamblers and their families, for example.
Then there’s the problem with lotteries being addictive. Ac-cording to the Council on the Compulsive Gambling of New Jersey, operator of the 1-800-GAMBLER help hotline, 43 percent of their callers had problems with lottery gambling.
One ETSU student said, “We used to live in a state that allowed lotteries. One month, when my stepdad got paid, he spent his whole check on lottery tickets, and that was nearly $400.”
Even if the lottery got passed, Georgia retailers don’t think the Tennessee lottery will make a significant dent into their profits.
“The people that are going to play lottery are going to play it and in my opinion it just gives them another opportunity to win big. And I think as many Georgians will go to Tennessee to play as Tennesseans are coming to Georgia to play,” said one Georgia retailer.
In order for the referendum to be passed, 50.1 percent of the voters must agree. If a voter does not vote for either candidate for governor, then their lottery vote will not count either.
The lottery question will be placed on ballots for the 2002 election. If passed, the lottery could be up and running as early as 2003.
For more information, check out www.family.org (con) or www.naspl.org (pro), among other sites.

Author