Posted on 02/06/2007 2:04:55 PM PST by kiriath_jearim
AUSTIN, Texas -- Gov. Rick Perry on Tuesday proposed selling the state lottery for at least $14 billion to create an endowment for Texans without health insurance and a trust fund for cancer research.
That money could be used to form a $2.7 billion endowment for the uninsured and to create a $3 billion fund for the fight against cancer, Perry said in his State of the State address.
Both funds would generate ongoing payments, he said.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsday.com ...
Recall!!!!!
... as well as higher taxes.
This effectively earmarks the lottery revenues for a new set of expenditures. The lottery revenues will have to be replaced, somehow.
The implication is that this is all somehow free, found money. It isn't.
All hair, no brain.
Time for a recall or a ride on a rail. Good-hair Perry needs to GTFO.
He's lost his mind.
Do illegal aliens qualify?
Of course they would. More pandering by the Republicrats in Texas.
I guess I'm not seeing the big picture.
Isn't the lotto an income generating business of sorts? Why sell that off?
Is Perry friends with any female astronuts? It's getting hard to tell Texas residents apart without a score card.
The lottery: a tax on stupid people and now up for the highest bidder. Can we get any more corrupt?
No, he's paying back reelection campaign debts! I know Merck & Co., Inc. was a financial supporter and we got the HPV vaccine order. Now, I am willing to bet that he is somehow financially beholden to someone in this lottery deal.
Funny how they only talk about the two endowments which only ads up to $5.7 billion. There is that pesky $8.3 billion of remaining monies from the sale.
And of course the loss of annual revenue of $3.8 billion.
But hey, privatization!
LOL! There's always an angle for these politicians...
Has Perry just gone out of his freaking mind lately?
Could be, but he's still lost his mind. Aren't the lottery funds earmarked for education?
The perfect minbo.
And while I swore that I would NOT vote for the governor slot I went ahead and mashed the screen for Perry.
The scary part he that he is STILL the best one of the lot.
Oh well, might as well take Claytie's advice.
One bad move after another...his political career just came to an end.
"That money could be used to form a $2.7 billion endowment for the uninsured and to create a $3 billion fund for the fight against cancer,"
that won't last the illegals long
I make jokes about giving California back to Mexico and giving Massachusetts back to the British.
Looks like we are giving Texas back to Mexico one piece at a time. Looks like the joke is on the citizens of Texas.
Coming soon -- State Income Tax !!! After the 2008 elections. Just watch.
No, that lie was told by Ann Richards I believe. The money goes into the general fund, everyone has their hands in it.
Wasn't it a group of Republican Governors who were responsible for putting forth George W. Bush for President?
If you can't stop it, you might as well enjoy it.
Only I've yet to figure how one can enjoy this one...heavy drinking?
You are all in favor of cancer and stuff!!!
Sarcasm
Anyway, the ONLY reason Perry won re-election is the other three candidates managed to be even more mediocre than him. Illinois had the same situtation where Governor Blagojevich (Idiot-Hairspray) had a 30% approval rating but won re-election due to his "opposition" being the ultra corrupt RINO state treasuer and a southern Illinois trial lawyer Green Party nominee who turned out to be a literal card-carrying Communist.
Perry's won the "popular" vote with 39% and Blago won the "popular" vote with 48% (and barely managed to even win the primary against a total unknown). Perry's so bad I was openly pulling for Kinky Friedman myself, until Kinky went off the deep end and announced a plan for "universal health care" in addition to legalizing crack and gay marriage. That was the last straw for me.
Any halfway decent candidate would have beaten Perry easily, and any halfway decent candidate would have beaten Blago. The problem is the "choices" on the ballot consisted of awful, awful, awful, and awful.
Perhaps instead of recall, we should have "none of the above" on the ballot in every election, like Nevada does. If "none of the above" manages to beat the real candidates, there should be a new election and the parties would be barred from nominating candidates defeated by "none of the above".
I look at it this way...
How much does it cost to have the people working for the state? Given the benefits that gubmint jobs provide, it seems outsourcing SHOULD be an option
You know those ads that come on TV urging lottery and other award winners to sell their winnings for quarters on the dollar? The states have been going on a binge of doing the same thing, whether its proposing selling the lottery, or toll roads, or offering "lifetime hunting licenses".
The whole idea is to get the money into the coffers now to cover up budget shortfalls in the short term and forget about what happens down the road.
For one thing it was established as a "trust fund" for education.
Well, I think the biggest tax increase in Texas history sort of put the handwriting on the wall...
You mean if rape is inevitable lie back and enjoy it?
But we don't HAVE a budget shortfall, that's why we don't understand why he keeps trying to get us in the shorts.
Humm, I wonder if they plan on increasing taxes on beer, too?
Perhaps he wants to engage in deficit spending without the political consequences.
Not trying to be argumentative, but if you look at the lottery website they claim all proceeds go to public school education. Look here: http://www.txlottery.org/export/sites/default/Supporting_Education/
LOL!
In Tennessee, lottery money must go to education (by constitutional amendment). Yeah, money is fungible, so sales tax revenue that could have gone to education can now go to other things, but if in Texas the lottery money is going to education by statute (and not constitutional amendment), and if it takes a statute to sell off the lottery, it would be possible for the new statute to repeal the old statute.
My sense of it is that the novelty of lotteries is wearing off and people aren't playing them as much, so maybe it does make sense from the state's perspective to sell.
Of course, must the payout remain the same if the lottery is sold? I would think though that players wouldn't stomach less than 50% payout.
What the hell has gone wrong in Texas???
Since the funds are earmarked for education, how is Perry going to replace them once he sells the lottery and sets up his little health care endowment? The most likely answer is the Texas taxpayer will take up the slack. Just today the state Republican party congratulated Perry on his plan to return excess funds to Texans in the form of property tax relief. We can kiss that goodbye with this lottery plan.
Hospitals would be thrilled to have the lottery pay for indigent health care, but I don't think this is the answer.
The big picture is clear as day, it's money for the politicians to hand out today. In a couple years when the money is spent and the revenue source is gone, that's someone else's problem.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.