SACRAMENTO -- The state lottery and its giant gambling-equipment suppliers are quietly pushing legislation -- backed by a powerful East Bay lawmaker -- that would slash schools' share of gaming revenue about 10 percent and give it to prize winners to reignite lotto mania.

Supporters insisted Thursday it would help schools overall, but foes don't want to bet kids' educations on it.

One critic, the California Teachers Association, said that changing the split of proceeds in the lottery-authorizing initiative voters approved 20 years ago -- with a bill that doesn't need voter approval -- could further harm schools already hurt by state and local fiscal woes.

But lottery and bill supporters -- such as GTECH Corp., an East Coast-based lotto machine maker that's pouring hundreds of thousands of dollars into lobbying for the measure -- said bigger jackpots would bolster total lottery sales.

Schools' share of proceeds would therefore increase, supporters said, even though education's share of total sales would be cut from 34 percent to as little as 25 percent.

To ease foes' fears that the experiment could fall short of its goal, proponents have included a guarantee that educational support won't drop below the $1 billion allocated last fiscal year. If it does, the lottery has vowed to make up the difference from its relatively slim administrative budget.

The scenario of increased gambling portrayed by supporters has itself drawn criticism from another sector. Anti-gambling groups said it would help make California the gaming capital of the world.

Senate Majority Leader Don Perata, D-Oakland, carried the first version of the legislation, which stalled in the Senate. The lottery has now introduced a similar version that's advancing in the Assembly.

"I did it as a favor because I thought, 'We have the lottery. We ought to get the most money we can out of it,'" Perata said.

Randy Cheek, the lottery's legislative liaison, said other states' experience shows it would boost California's stagnant lottery sales and increase education's allocation by up to $275 million annually, even with a smaller percentage of proceeds going to schools.

"Do you want a slice of 8-inch pizza or do you want a slice from the 20-inch pizza?" Cheek said he is asking the educational sector.

GTECH Corp., which makes lotto machines that could be in greater demand, has spent more than$340,000 in the past year lobbying on the issue and another bill.

"I know intuitively some people look at this and say it means we're going to lower certain required percentages (for education and administration), but in fact you create a (sales) volume that increases the whole," said company spokesman Bob Vincent.

The California Teachers Association opposed Perata's bill and is expected to take a formal position against the new Assembly bill.

"Part of the concern is that, in the end, this could backfire and short schools as opposed to helping them," said a CTA spokeswoman.

Perata guided the proposal to a vote soon after the Legislature convened for the year -- so swiftly some lawmakers said they were surprised and confused by the bill. Others were skeptical. It fell eight votes short of the necessary 27-vote, two-thirds margin in the 40-member Senate.

The proposal split both Republicans and Democrats in the upper house. Of the Democratic Bay Area delegation, Perata, Senate leader John Burton of San Francisco, and Sen. Liz Figueroa of Fremont voted yes, while Sens. Jackie Speier of San Mateo and Byron Sher of Palo Alto voted no.

With the path in the upper house apparently blocked, proponents then radically switched tactics, asking a Republican in the lower house to carry the bill. The measure, by Assemblyman George Plescia of Poway, was directed last week to two committees but hearings have yet to be set.

In the process, supporters broadened proposed changes to the lottery-authorizing constitutional amendment of 1984, which allows legislation altering its contents on a two-thirds vote if it furthers the education-benefiting goal.

In Perata's version, the percentage of lottery revenue allocated to prizes would have increased from 50 percent to no more than 60 percent. The percentage of proceeds allotted to education would have been reduced from 34 percent to at least 26 percent. And the amount for administration costs would go down from 16 percent to 14 percent.

In Plescia's version, the prize percentage would climb to no more than 62 percent and schools' share would drop to at least 25 percent, leaving the remaining 13 percent for administration.

The legislation would remain in effect until 2012, when lawmakers could consider extending it.