One of the methods states use to build public support for gambling is to say the proceeds will go to support public schools, senior citizens or some other broad-based constituency.

Of course, this is just an accounting gimmick that would make Enron executives smile. Any money set aside from the lottery or casinos just means less revenue from the general fund. Even worse, states are starting to go back on promises made to fund special programs because of shortfalls in gambling revenue.

Take Tennessee, which announced plans to scale back funding from the lottery to pay for college scholarships for in-state students. Georgia was the first state to use lottery revenue to pay for college tuition, but the program there was also scaled back because of a massive budget shortfall.

The changes in the scholarship program essentially takes away the one argument for gambling. At least someone was benefiting from the gambling losses. But the reality is that gambling revenue is an unsustainable way to fund government operations. Gambling – through the lottery or casinos – is also a regressive tax that hits the poor and elderly the hardest. In a sense, poor people that play the lottery finance the college scholarships that usually go to middle class families. That’s also not a sound policy over the long term.

One of the main reasons states have turned to legalizing casinos is the high tax rates levied on gambling. But a proposal to legalize casinos in Florida comes with a relatively low tax rate, according to the Miami Herald.

In Florida, the proposed tax rate on casinos would be 10 percent. By comparison, Pennsylvania taxes casinos at 55 percent. Such a low rate makes the effort to legalize casinos in Florida even more dubious. If the state isn’t going to maximize its revenues then why legalize an industry that brings so many social and economic problems?

More specifically, the special tax rate that is levied on casinos underscores what essentially is a joint partnership between the government and the gambling industry. The two need each other to survive. While both the state and the casino profit, the taxpayers are the ultimate losers.

This is what passes for culture in Las Vegas. A restaurant named after the former mayor of Las Vegas held auditions for women to be “ambassador broads.”

According to an online job posting, the restaurant’s “ambassador broads” will “courteously and efficiently interact with guests to ensure their satisfaction while dining.” Only in Las Vegas. The job is essentially a casino host in cocktail attire.

Then again only Las Vegas would elect a former mob attorney as its mayor. In fact, the restaurant where the “broads” will work is named after the former mayor, Oscar Goodman. Goodman’s wife succeeded him as mayor.

The “broads” shtick may work in Las Vegas. After all this is a town that promotes sex. But the demeaning treatment of women is part of the broader sleazy culture that comes with a town hooked on gambling. Such a race to the bottom is sure to seep into the fabric of other states and cities that legalize casinos and promote gambling as a misguided means of economic development.

Now that Massachusetts has legalized casinos, the knee-jerk response of other neighboring states is to also look to add casinos. The result is going to be a gambling arms race in New England that will likely lead to increased gambling problems and social ills.

The Mohegan Sun, an Indian casino in Connecticut, suddenly wants to build a casino in Palmer, Mass. Next year, Rhode Island voters will be asked to approve a ballot question on whether to turn a slot parlor into a casino. There are also efforts to add casinos in New Hampshire and Maine.

The spread of casinos threatens to transform New England, known for its natural beauty and worth ethic. Instead, will be gaudy casinos and get-rich-quick ethos. New England’s gambling binge is part of broader push to add casinos in a number of states across the country as lawmakers scramble to close budget holes. This misguided effort could result in a nation and state governments hooked on gambling.

It is time to start calling the bluff of the gambling industry and its partners: elected officials. Promises of jobs, tax relief and economic development never quite materialize once the casinos open. (See post below.)

Casino backers in New Hampshire are touting tax relief for businesses. But the bill does not contain any language to provide such tax cuts. Never mind that it makes no sense to use a regressive tax like gambling to cut taxes for businesses.

Even worse, former New Hampshire senator Jim Rubens, who chairs the Granite State Coalition Against Expanded Gambling, cautions that many of the promises from gambling never materialize. It’s good to see some are catching on to the games played by the gambling industry and lawmakers.

A City Council committee gave a thumbs up to more gambling in Philadelphia. SugarHouse, a dump of a casino located in sketchy part of the city, plans to add more gambling space and a seven-story parking garage.

Sadly, the garage may well make it easier for gamblers to leave their kids in the car. (At least there will be some shade.) But it sounds like the garage will be bigger than the casino, which is about the size of a big box retail store.

The casino has failed to attract any tourists and instead preys mainly on the poor, Asians, and the elderly in a city with a poverty rate of 25 percent. As casino critic Paul Boni points out, the casino depends largely on repeat business from locals, many of whom may have gambling problems. But rather than try to stop the spread of gambling, and all of its social and economic problems, city and state elected officials are happy to enable the expansion.