Both the Washington Post and the Philadelphia Inquirer wrote stories in the past two days discussing the financial support that Sugarhouse Casino majority-owner Neil Bluhm has provided to the presidential campaign of Senator Barack Obama. As the Inquirer tells us:

The Obama campaign said yesterday it saw nothing inconsistent in the senator's accepting support from Neil G. Bluhm, a Chicago-based real estate developer. According to the Washington Post, Bluhm has bundled together $78,000 in contributions from himself and his family.

Mr. Obama's position on casino gambling seems confusing at best. He made one oft-mentioned quote to the Chicago Defender back as a State Senator, fighting the then-Governor of Illinois Rod Blogojevich's hopes to patch up a budget deficit with casino receipts, saying that the "moral and social cost of gambling, particularly in low income communities could be devastating." But during and after his hard-fought race for the presidential primary win in the Nevada caucus, he defended himself against Clinton camp attacks on his gambling positions by saying:

Asked in February about his views, Obama told The Associated Press that Nevada should be proud of how it's used gambling as a "very successful economic model."

"The concerns that I had in Illinois related to the way in which those who own these (gambling river) boats had a very exclusive monopoly, were making enormous contributions to the state Legislature and were having a disproportionate influence on the legislation," Obama said.

Obama also was a critic of lawmakers accepting political contributions from gambling interests that were seeking permits from the Illinois Legislature.

The Senator said he continued to believe there is "certainly a potential moral and social cost to gambling, if it's not properly regulated, if children have access to it. It's something I continue to be concerned about."

I'm volunteering with Casino Free Philadelphia over the next few weeks/months, helping them to build connections with legislators and allies in Harrisburg who have similar questions about the influence of gambling money on politics.

Now that Mr. Obama is stumping for votes in Pennsylvania, and pushing for a big win in our hometown, he should put Philly's preferences on casinos at the front of his agenda.

If Mr. Obama is concerned about the social costs of casinos in cities, he should take a quick look at the comprehensive report Casino-Free Philadelphia just released, demonstrating that casinos in our neighborhoods will generate a $52 million net loss every year to the city. And if Mr. Obama is ready to extend his critique of an Illinois-state-legislature-too-covered-in-casino-money-to-think-straight to our friends in Harrisburg, he should take a look at the Philadelphia Magazine expose of how our gaming law was set up in PA.

What does Senator Obama's opponent think of casinos in our communities? As reported by DemocraticUnderground.com, Senator Clinton is a bit more cavalier about those costs:

In a brief interview Thursday with The Times, Clinton described the gambling industry as an "economic development tool" and said that "for many places in the country, it seems to be an important part of what they are trying to do to revive and maintain an economic base."

Clinton likened the potential social costs of gambling to the costs of other industries that pollute or leave toxic dumps, saying that the impact "depends on how well-regulated it is."

"Any human activity has social costs, really," she said, adding later: "Life is filled with trade-offs, and you have to do the best you can to balance the pluses and the minuses."

I dug around and found a copy of the LA Times article, if you want more insignts on her position.

Folks in Philadelphia might have a chance to vote their conscience on casinos all up and down the Democratic ticket -- if we can get the campaigns to let us know whether or not they think we have the right to decide whether or not casinos come to our neighborhoods. Here's a good background document from The American Prospect on both Presidential Democratic candidates and their positions on casino gambling. Writer Kelly Nuxoll details the lack of clarity in both candidates' positions -- while noting that Senator Clinton has received more than double the money from the gaming industry as Senator Obama.