L. Olson, K. Guth, and J. Guth. Sociology of Religion, 64 (1):
87--110(April 2003)On November 7, 2000, despite the ardent pleas of clergy from across the spectrum of religious traditions, South Carolina voters repealed a constitutional amendment to pave the way for a state lottery. In a state known for intense evangelical religiosity, this outcome raises several important questions about the political influence of religion and religious leaders. In this article we offer a history of the religious aspects of the lottery debate in South Carolina and an empirical look at the relationships between religious factors and support for the lottery among South Carolina voters. Specifically, we explore the extent to which involvement in evangelical Protestantism, political salience of religion, and clergy cues affected public support for a state lottery. Data for the empirical analysis are drawn from an October 3, 2000 poll of 450 South Carolinians who had voted in two previous elections..
C. Boyle. The Statistician, 47 (2):
291--321(1998)Organizations select people to receive benefits in a way which is efficient to them but may not be fair to those selected or rejected. This paper elaborates on the concept of fairness-that it should be efficient, not waste the efforts of the candidates; that it should treat as equals all those who are not measurably different; that the process of selection should avoid bias and corruption. Lotteries have been used in the past partly to avoid corruption. Some examples of lottery-type selection remain today, such as juries. This paper examines the case for the deliberate introduction of a lottery as part of the selection process to approximate to the uncertainty in measuring the merits of the candidates. The advantages of such a lottery, particularly where decisions are devolved down to the community level, are discussed..