I have been thinking about this a bit, and I have some concerns. I understand that lotteries are a common thing and people like to play them. I'm not opposed to having a lottery, but I'm not so sure about linking the revenue to a scholarship program. Studies have shown that apparently people that play lotteries skew to the lower incomes, so essentially some wealthy families that never played the lottery because they don't need to or want to potentially get to send their kids to college for (nearly) free without ever having to contribute to the program at all. That doesn't seem quite fair to me.
You raise valid concerns, but lotteries are entirely voluntary. Those who do not play the lottery cannot win prizes. I believe this lottery has been designed in a socially responsible way that returns a higher than average amount to the players. If you still have concerns, we could make lottery winnings exempt from regional taxation, which would shift the income tax burden away from lottery players.
I also have some concerns about the fairness of the lottery when it's run by a bureaucracy that needs a certain amount of money in order to function. If the fund ever starts to get on the low end, there will be an incentive to lower the chances of winning. That incentive might even exist if the fund isn't low because officials will still probably be held responsible for meeting certain profit thresholds.
The Corporation is government-owned, and is basically run as a non-profit corporation. Lotteries have tried to reduce payouts in order to improve profitability, but it does not work, because fewer people play the lottery when prizes are smaller and/or harder to win. The "as nearly as practical" language was included in clause 8 to allow Corporation management to determine the most fiscally prudent percentage to transfer. If we determine that the lottery is generating higher than expected revenues, the Legislature can consider funding some other programs so that the money is put to good use. (e.g. non-profit private colleges, further grants for low-income students, etc.)
And lastly, the part about excluding people with student debt problems. I'm not sure how that relates to being eligible for a merit based scholarship.
That is standard language. Colleges and universities do not even permit students to enroll until they've cleared their financial obligations with other educational institutions. Student loans are voluntary programs, and if someone is in default on another government financial aid program, it does not make sense to give them another one.
