C H A P T E R Speaking to Persuade15

Slide 1

1. The speaker beginswith a casual personalreference.

2. The introductioncontinues with the storyof Andy D that appealsto the emotions oflisteners.

3. Michael states hisproposition of policyfollowed by the thesis.The PowerPoint slidevisually reinforces thethree reasons in thethesis.

4. The speaker beginshis first reason.

Statistics are presentedon PowerPoint slides,and sources are pro-vided on the visuals toverify the information.

Persuasive Speech to ConvinceMichael Becker

1. The other day I was at the grocery store, picking up a few odds and ends, and on myway out I passed the Instant Lottery ticket machine. I had a couple dollars on me inchange, and I said, “What the heck.” I bought a ticket and scratched it off. Needless tosay, I didn’t win. It’s only a couple of dollars, no big deal right? Well for some people, itis a very big deal.

2. Consider the story of Andy D, as told in the May 1996 issue of Money magazine. Hewas a well-paid executive, making about $100,000 a year back in 1982 when he spenthis first dollar on a lottery game. Over the next eight years he became compulsive andhad over $100,000 in losses. This left him without his home, his wife, his children,and his job. In fact, he was so destitute he had to move in with his mother. But didthat stop him from playing the lottery? No it did not. He continued to play withmoney he stole from his mother. Finally, he hit rock bottom when he tried to play thelottery to win enough money to pay for his daughter’s first semester in college. Dis-traught at the fact he didn’t win, he took a razor blade and slit his wrists and almostdied. Thankfully, he recovered in the hospital and got in touch with Gamblers’ Anony-mous. Sadly though, Andy’s story isn’t the only one of its kind.

3. State-run lotteries should be abolished (slide 1) because they exploit the poor andundereducated, they are addictive, and they are marketed deceptively.

4. Now who plays the lottery? (slide 2) You can see from this picture that the lottery isavailable in thirty-seven states and the District of Columbia. That’s over 80 percent ofthe population. If you look at participation (slide 3) rates for the country, it’s prettymuch even through all socioeconomic groups whether you are a high school dropoutor college graduate—whether you make under $10,000 or over $100,000 per year—it’s pretty much the same; it’s in the 50 to 60 percent range of people who play.

5. The thing that’s startling is who plays the most. (slide 4) Now you can see in this chartthat I made from the Report to the National Gambling Impact Study Commission, it’s

5. The speaker usesmore statistics as evi-dence to support hisfirst reason.

Let’s End State-Run Lotteries

Slide 2 Slide 3

Slide 4 Slide 5

Michael cites a sourceto validate his statistics.

The speaker cites abrief example to endthe first reason andbegin reason two.

the poor—people who make under $10,000 per year—who play the most. If you lookat this you can see that if you make under $10,000 a year, you’re spending about $600per year on the lottery—that’s almost 6 percent of your income. If you look at theundereducated people, (slide 5) it’s just as bad if not worse. People who have less than ahigh school education spend about $700 on the yearly lottery. Now to back these statsup, I found an interesting article in a May 22, 1999, issue of the New York Times. Itsays that an analysis of New Jersey state lottery data found that in zip codes where peo-ple with the lowest incomes live, the amounts spent for $10,000 of income were fivetimes the amounts spent in wealthier zip codes. And it continued to tell the story ofDennis Dutton who is a custodian. He spends $15 a day, every day, on the lottery, yethe doesn’t have the money to pay for his phone bill. So Dennis Dutton is one of thosepeople that the lottery exploits.

6. But Mr. Dutton is not only exploited, he is also addicted.

6. The external transi-tion is a listening cuebetween reasons oneand two.

C H A P T E R Speaking to Persuade15

308

Slide 6 Slide 7

7. The speaker explainsgambling addictionverified by the USAToday source andmakes reference toconclusions from Dr.Dodes, an expert inproblem gambling.

The speaker uses aPowerPoint slide topresent statistics show-ing the percentage ofproblem gamblers whoplay lottery games.Notice that a crediblesource is provided.

9. Michael introduceshis opposition argu-ment that lottery fundsare used for goodcauses.

10. He then knocks thisreasoning down withhis rebuttal argument(verified by a source)that indicates moniesdon’t really increasespending for “goodcauses.”

7. And you might wonder why someone who spends $15 a day on a lottery ticket can’tpay his phone bill? Well the answer is, they’re addicted to the lottery. Now addiction togambling, you might be wondering, how is that possible? Well the truth is, it is verysimilar to drug addiction. According to the April 5, 1999, USA Today, research sug-gests that anticipating a big win releases a rush of “feel-good” chemicals in the brain.The gambler then becomes hooked, not on heroin or other chemical substances, buton substances that form naturally in the body. And as an example of how addictive thelottery can be, consider what Dr. Lance Dodes, Director of the Center for ProblemGambling, at Mt. Auburn Hospital in Cambridge said. He estimates that 40 percentof his patients are lottery players. Now it’s easy to see how lotteries hook people whenyou consider a game like video Keno that, according to the May 6, 1996, issue ofMoney magazine, is so addictive, that lottery players call it “lotto crack.” Now as far asproblem gambling is concerned, an article in a 1997 issue of the Boston Globe reportsthat (slide 6 ) 2.7 percent of the overall population at some point in their lives becomeproblem gamblers. But when you look at lottery players, the numbers are much higher—9 percent. As far as Keno players go, it’s as high as 14 percent who become compul-sive gamblers. In fact, that study concluded by saying that Keno in particular fostersaddiction.

8. Just as players get addicted to lottery games, state governments are addicted to the rev-enue they provide, and in order to keep that revenue coming, these governmentsactively and deceptively market the lottery.

9. Now the biggest reason that proponents of the lottery argue in favor of it is that thefunds that are raised are used for good causes like education, public buildings, the arts,et cetera.

10. Well, that’s a fallacy. The truth is that less money from the general fund is spent onthat. Since they have money from the lottery, they take money away from the generalfund and spend less money on education so it’s nearly a wash. (slide 7) As you look atsome of these stats, the May 1999 issue of Money magazine reported that from 1990to 1995, the average share of state spending on education declined from 50.1 percentto 49 percent in lottery states, while spending in nonlottery states rose slightly from

The speaker comparesand contrasts fundingin lottery states withnonlottery states.

Let’s End State-Run Lotteries

Slide 8 Slide 9

11. The external transi-tion links reason twowith reason three.

12. The speaker uses aquote from a Connecti-cut lottery commercialto indicate misleadingmessages.

The speaker explainsthe odds of winning theBig Game and quotesThe Economist to showthe absurdity of actu-ally having a 50–50chance of winning thejackpot.

13. Michael explainsthat states can usedeceptive practicesbecause they wereexempted from truth-in-advertising laws.

58.2 to 58.9 percent. In fact, it continued, Florida; which created its lottery in 1988to enhance education, spent only 14 percent of its $829 million from lottery profitson education in 1999.

11. And not only are they deceptive about where the money goes, states are also deceptivein the messages they send.

12. Consider this commercial from the Connecticut lottery. “When I was younger, I sup-pose I could have done more to plan my future,” says the smiling young man, “but Ididn’t. Or I could have made some smart investments. But I didn’t. Heck, I couldhave bought a one-dollar Connecticut Lotto ticket, won a jackpot worth millions,and got a nice big check every year for twenty years. And I did! I won!” Well howrealistic is this? Then at the end of that commercial a voice-over says, “Overallchances of winning are one in thirty.” But that’s the chance of winning a small prize—not the jackpot. (slide 8) The chances of winning the big lotto prizes for your aver-age lottery game are about 12 to 14 million to 1. The Big Game or Megamillions asits called now, is as high as 70 million to 1. But what I like best is how the 1992 issueof The Economist put it: “To stand a 50–50 chance of winning the jackpot in Califor-nia’s twice-weekly lottery, you would need to buy a ticket in every drawing for thenext 110, 372 years.” That’s just a 50–50 chance. (slide 9) Those are some seriouslylong odds!

13. Additionally, prizes are often overstated by expressing them in terms of annuity asopposed to the present value. They’re always stated in annuity payments over twentyor twenty-five years. Now how do states get away with this deceptive advertising?Well, surprisingly enough, an article in The American Prospect in June of 2001 reportsthat Congress exempted state lotteries from the Federal Trade Commission’s truth-in-advertising laws. So basically it’s carte blanche for state lotteries.

14. When it comes to lotteries, I’d have to agree with what New York Governor GeorgePataki said: “The state should not be hustling its citizenry with the lure of meremoney. It is the job of government to protect the welfare of its citizens. Lotteries domuch more harm than good.”

14. The speaker beginshis conclusion with aquotation from Gover-nor Pataki and endswith a strong chal-lenge, asking the audi-ence to agree with hisproposition to abolishstate lotteries.