The Inquirer argues against another casino in Philadelphia by rightly making the connection between how gambling preys on the most vulnerable citizens.

Given the city’s poverty rate of more than 25 percent, the last thing Philadelphia needs is another place where citizens living on the edge can squander what little money they have left. Indeed, a separate story in The Inquirer pointed out how the one casino in Philadelphia has fallen well short of its financial projections in its first year in business.

A second license was issued for a casino in the city, but the owner failed to line up the financing and the state revoked its license. What will become of that license remains up in the air. For now, one less casino is good news for Philly.

The prospect of legalizing casinos in Florida has caught the attention of all the high rollers. It’s interesting to see that one of the biggest gambling magnates in the country is cozying up to Gov. Rick Scott.

The Miami Herald reports that Las Vegas Sands owner Sheldon Adelson will be the guest of the governor’s during a debate today before traveling to meet with lawmakers in Miami. 

Adelson’s company is ensnared in a legal dispute with a former manager who alleges he was fired for objecting to a bribery scheme in Macau.

Meanwhile, the company recently disclosed that the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Justice Department are investigating possible violations of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, which is an anti-bribery statute. The casinos companies should fit in just fine in Florida.

Here’s a glimpse of what Massachusetts is in for if it adds more commercial casinos across the state.

Sandi Hall lost $1,000 playing slot machines in one hour in Foxwoods Casino two years ago. Over the course of two-years, the Rhode Island grandmother lost at least $40,000 at the Indian casino in Connecticut and a slots parlor Rhode Island, according to the Boston Globe.

It’s bad enough to lose money gambling. But what about the few who win and don’t get paid? Federal prosecutors alleged that a popular online poker Website was a lucrative Ponzi scheme.

Federal prosecutors in Manhattan filed a civil complaint on Tuesday that alleges players around the world entrusted Full Tilt Poker with $390 million in gambling money, and promised to keep those funds in secure accounts. Instead much of it went to line the pockets of the owners and management at Full Tilt, which was headquartered in Dublin. As a result, many winning gamblers didn’t get paid.

“Full Tilt was not a legitimate poker company but a global Ponzi scheme,” said Preet S. Bharara, the United States attorney for the Southern District of New York in Manhattan.

Full Tilt and other poker sites were shut down in the U.S. last spring. Some have used the case to argue for the federal government to legalize online poker so it can be better regulated and taxed. If that is the case, then the same argument should apply to illegal drugs and prostitution. Better regulation will not stop citizens from losing millions of dollars, and going even deeper into debt. In fact, legalizing gambling online will only make it easier for more Americans to play and lose their money. The result will be an even greater extraction of wealth from communities, increased social ills, and an increase in problem gamblers among younger people.

A better argument is for government to get out of the gambling business all together.

A study done by a group opposed to casinos found that a new casino has cost the area much more than the tax revenue it has generated. The analysis – done by Casino Free Philadelphia – found that gamblers have lost $232 million since the SugarHouse Casino opened, while the city has received $11 million in tax revenue.

Meanwhile, the casino investors have pocketed $54 million, and more than half of that went to investor who live out of state. The study said more than 500 people have received consumer credit from the casino, creating tens of thousands of dollars of debt.

The study points to increases in crime and bankruptcy since the casino opened. It also says that the jobs that have been created are nonunion and have gone mainly to white men. The majority of residents in Philadelphia are minorities. So the jobs figures indicate that minorities are not benefiting as much from the casino.

The data comes as Pennsylvania’s state treasurer released a report arguing for a 5th casino in the Philadelphia area. While Treasurer Rob McCord’s report says there is room for another casino, it also says the market is becoming saturated and warned of competition from surrounding states. Read the full report here.

In other words, open the casino now and cash in while the getting is good. The study hints at the fact that gambling is not a sustainable public policy. Beyond the social ills that casinos create, the revenue stream is not reliable. In short, governments can’t expect to continue to finance state budgets by getting residents to throw more and more money away at casinos.

It is disappointing to see a smart, progressive elected official – who is likely to run for governor one day – weigh in with his support for even more casinos while ignoring the all the downsides of gambling highlighted in the CasinoFree Philly report.

A recent poll says New Yorkers support casinos in the state. Of course, most people who support gambling don’t understand the negative impact it has on the state. Since the majority of residents don’t gamble, they don’t think it impacts them. But in reality, problem gamblers cost every taxpayer.

Studies show that wherever casinos locate crime increases. The cost to investigate, prosecute and imprison those criminals is paid for by taxpayers. Bankruptcy also increases. So do divorce rates and suicide. Society pays for the loss in productivity and the destruction to those families in a number of ways.

More broadly, casinos extract wealth from individuals, leaving gamblers poorer. Casinos also suck money out the economy that would have been spent on other businesses, including restaurants, entertainment, and, in extreme cases, child support, rent and car payments. It is fair to say that if residents were armed with more information, public support for casinos would not be so strong.

Interestingly, the author of the piece says he supports gambling as long as the casino isn’t located near him. That’s a telling indication of how people ‘support’ casinos, but don’t want them.

An ethics column in The New York Times raises an interesting question about state-run lotteries: Is it OK to keep selling scratch-off lottery tickets after a winning ticket has been purchased?

What a deal. It sure sounds like a lousy way to do business, especially for the government. However, the ethicist’s short answer is, yes, it is OK. But the column also looks at the broader ethical issue of states using gambling to fund government operations. The upshot: that is not a good public policy.

As for the scratch-off lottery tickets, the odds of winning are long enough as it is. Who knew states continued to sell losing tickets after the winning one was purchased? That’s your government working to protect you.

What if Frank Purdue didn’t eat chicken? Or if Sam Walton didn’t shop at Wal-Mart? Or if Henry Ford drove a Toyota? Customers probably wouldn’t trust the product.

That same logic doesn’t apply to gambling industry titans. Our friends at Stop Predatory Gambling have put together an impressive list of casino owners and elected officials who don’t gamble. The list is a who’s who of the gambling industry, and includes casino magnates like Donald Trump and Steve Wynn.

Wynn rightly says the only way to win at a casino is to own one. He should know. His casinos and others make money from losers. The casino owners clearly know the deck is stacked against their customers and that they are taking advantage of desperate people, often living on the edge.

Many gamblers visit a casino dozens or hundreds of times a year, hoping to get lucky. In fact, a good chunk of the casino industry’s business model depends on catering to addicted gamblers who often play until they are broke or worse. Some are driven to steal money in order to feed their gambling habit. That is why studies show crime, bankruptcy and suicide increase wherever casinos locate.

Casino owners know this. So do their government partners. Even worse, lawmakers should not enable such an insidious business that thrives off of the destruction of the citizens they are elected to protect.

A group in Florida has been re-activated to fight plans to legalize casinos in the Sunshine State.

In 1994, No Casinos Inc. raised $1.5 million and successfully fought an effort to legalize casinos. The organization is headed by Orlando public relations consultant John Sowinski who summarized how elected officials from both major parties contradict core principals in the base by supporting casinos: “We will remind Republicans who count on the votes of conservative Republicans that you can’t be pro-families and pro-gambling at the same time,’’ he said. “And we’ll remind Democrats, who count on votes of those who want to protect the most vulnerable, that you can’t be for the less fortunate and for expanded gambling at the same time.”

Sowinski also understands that elected officials often ram through gambling without much consideration of the policy ramifications. Instead, lawmakers are swayed by casino lobbyists and the lure of getting their hands on more tax revenue to spend.

“This is a different battle, in that it’s in the Legislature,’’ Sowinski said. “But the only chance it has to pass is if people in Tallahassee think they can do it in the dark of night — without the public paying attention. Our goal is to make sure it gets attention.’’

Gov. Andrew Cuomo said he expects to announce his position on legalizing commercial casinos in New York by January.

The gambling issue is clearly heating up in New York. Both the state Senate and Assembly leaders favor casinos. Cuomo hinted his support earlier but now says it is a complicated position.

Even Mayor Michael Bloomberg seems resigned to cashing in, saying he didn’t think it was a good policy but if it is going to be legalized, the city might as well collect the revenue. That is such a weaselly, cop out position. Rather than fight against something he knows is wrong, Bloomberg would rather take the money and run.

New York seems headed down the path of other states that are willing to overlook all the social ills that come with casinos – including higher crime, divorce and bankruptcy – in an effort to collect more tax revenue. This is a bad public policy that does more harm than good.