CA Lotto: Case Study in Double Standards

Gambling is illegal in the State of California.  Naturally I think gambling should be legal.  Anyone should be allowed to make voluntary foolish choices to throw their money away at large casinos wishing for riches, just as a child throws a penny in a shopping center fountain in hopes of a puppy.  However, Californian legislators have decided to legislate morality on this issue, as they have in many other areas.

As always, though, there are exceptions that are (or were) convenient to the empowered elite at one point in time or another.  The few exceptions outlined in the California constitution seem extremely arbitrary.  Casinos like the ones in Nevada and New Jersey are explicitly banned (those two states are specifically mentioned, by the way), unless it is on Native American reservation land.  Some other gambling opportunities are legal but only if conducted for a legal non-profit purpose and 90% of the proceeds goes to the non-profit cause.  Betting on horseraces is permitted too.  Though flawed fundamentally, I can at least see the reasoning behind allowing casinos on Native American land and not everywhere else... the guilt thing right?  And the non-profit thing... okay, they should at least let people throw away their money to "help others," right? 

But horseracing? 

Was there a horseracing lobby that pushed for the legalization of horse races?  Dog racers and pig racers didn't have a strong enough lobbying firm.  Nor did the advocates for football pools, poker nights, and world soccer tournaments.  Poor saps.

All of that is mind-numbingly frustrating enough... but here's the part that chaps my hide.  I'll quote directly from the CA constitution.

CA Constitution Article IV, Legislative, Sec. 19., subdivisions (a) and (d) state:

"(a) The Legislature has no power to authorize lotteries, and shall prohibit the sale of lottery tickets in the State.

...
(d) Notwithstanding subdivision (a), there is authorized the establishment of a California State Lottery."

Really?  They couldn't even put their double standard on a separate page to help our eyes glaze over and ignore it?  I suppose they assume that no one reads the state constitution anyway, so it seemed safe enough to them.  They essentially say "No one is allowed to have lotteries... except us of course!"  Sillyness.  Officials would probably claim that it is for a non-profit cause, like propping up our deeply flawed public school system where most kids are trained for a life in military service, union jobs, or prison.  Even still, I'm not convinced that entities with "non-profit" status are entitled to special exceptions to laws, even stupid laws.  And I say this as a board member of a non-profit! 

I have a better solution... instead of adding more exceptions and double standards to the Article IV of the CA constitution to rectify a stupid law, we should add one last provision, subdivision (g) should state:
(g) Subdivisions (a) through (f) are indefinitely nullified.