1990_0220_packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

BACKGROUND 9 41 As the, result oflegislative negotiations in 1989,1 Minnesota has one of the more complicated regulatory structures for lawful gambling. In the next sec- tion we review how other states have organized, their regulation of charitable gambling. Mi G.t t OTHER STATES ,; NAVIL I Forty-five states and, the District, of Columbia had some form of charitable gambling, during 1988, according to the National Association of Fundraisiong Ticket Manufacturers. Bingo, was the largest, activity and accounted for over 48 pericent of all amounts wagered. Plull-tabs were allowed in 26 states and represented an, additional, 41, percent of' amounts wagered. Contrary, to national trends, plull -tabis are the leading, charity gaming activity in . .. . ......... Minnesota, riepresen,t�i,ng over 8i8 percent of all grioss receipts. As seen in Minnesota a Table L I, Minnesota L*s the, nation's leader in gross riecei,pts from pull-tabs and leads the second only to North Dakota in per, capita, spending, on pull-tabs. In fact, Mi in- 61 0 nation in nesiot,a accounted for almost 40 percent of national pull,-tabs receipts in 1988. Minnesota and North, Dakota, the states, with, the top payout percentages, dollars spent also have by, far the highest', per capita spending. This is probably because the on pullotabs. high payout provides greater incentive to play, and, also results * I in greater rein- vestment of winnings. Table 1.2 presents a 21-state comparison of'lawful gambling proceeds ul- timately available for use by charities. Minnesota's relatively low percentage ofgross receipts available for lawful purpose contributions results in part from 41 its high, payback percentage.