With President-elect Obama in town to figure out how to solve the nation’s budget crisis, here’s one suggestion: stop state-sponsored gambling.

There’s no question that this industry - whose proponents once crowed had a "license to print money" - has lost its lustre. With the economy in a tailspin, casinos don’t just drag their own industry down, they bring city budgets and people with them:

Consider:

• The City of New Haven has to fix a $500,000 budget hole after overly rosy gambling revenue projections didn’t meet their mark this year.

• In July, the Natl. Conference of State Legislatures reported that specific conditions have dramatically impacted state budgets, noting that Nevada is particularly worried about gambling and its impact on state revenues.

• Last year's PICA report warned that the city put itself at "financial risk" by not calculating the cost of casinos. They referred to sources which showed a range of costs of up to $200 million annually from gambling and the potential for net job losses based on employment studies from different states with gambling.

Faced with these concerns, what’s been the solution in other states?

More gambling of course – and don’t forget the booze and girls.

• Twin River, RI is begging for table games to save the bankrupt slots house.

• Foxwoods itself is seeking 24-hour alcohol service at its Connecticut casino to remain competitive. "You gotta be kidding me," said one local official in outrage.

• But my favorite story is outta A.C.:
  

  "On Dec. 13, the casino will host the Running of The Santas, part of a nationwide bar tour in which participants don Santa hats, beards and suits, and do their own version of Pamplona's running of the bulls. Only at the head of this race will be Hooters girls."

  Yep. The running of the bulls only with creepy old men chasing down Hooter girls. Because it sounds fun. And oh yeah, it makes the casino money.

  "The holidays tend to have many businesses competing for customer attention," said Mark Giannantonio, president of the Tropicana Casino and Resort. "The light show, in addition to our decor, shopping, entertainment and focus on our guests throughout the season ... ultimately will give people a reason to choose Tropicana."

There’s always a sucker a minute when it comes to easy cash.

Just listen to Fishtown’s Maggie O’Brien, who commented about the recent inking of a $1.5 million deal between Sugarhouse and a group that formed ad hoc to negotiate a community benefits agreement (since no other established neighborhood association would):

And - be still, fibrillating hearts - up to $1.5 million a year to fund stuff that the community decides could use the dough.

Like a library, maybe? Or a swimming pool? Fire services? All are Fishtown amenities slated for closure.

"With $1.5 million, we could buy the library and run it ourselves," says Maggie O'Brien, president of Fishtown Action (FACT), a pro-casino neighborhood group that has co-signed the CBA (along with the New Kensington CDC). "We could keep the pool and firehouse."

She exhales angrily.

"It didn't have to come to this. If the casino was up and running, we might not be losing anything right now."

Fishtown deserves every bit of concern with all the closures in their community while a slots house tries to open up down the street. But beyond that, there’s nothing in O’Brien’s comments that are backed by economic or historical reality. In fact, an increasing number of studies show that just the opposite may be true – that gambling is a net loser for society rather than a win.

Recently, the Charleston Post & Courier editorialized against gambling, reminding readers that the state banned video poker in 2000 after "problems it created offset any benefit."

And Sunday’s Inquirer had the strongest op-ed to date against the costs of gambling. This isn’t just about sad stories about gambling’s individual losers, but about a serious drain on the economic and social fabric of communities and city budgets.

But many are starting to think about the long-term impact of gambling on the city. Beyond the current economic woes, Nobel-winner Paul Samuelson found few benefits from gambling, calling it "sterile transfers of money or goods between individuals, creating no new money or goods." He added: "Although it creates no output, gambling does nevertheless absorb time and resources. When pursued beyond the limits of recreation, where the main purpose after all is to kill time, gambling subtracts from the national income."

Keep that in mind the next time a bureaucrat touts the benefits of gambling.

Casino Free Philadelphia has published a comprehensive cost-benefit report titled "You Pay Even If You Don’t Play" that finds a $57 million net loss to the city budget as a result of slots.

Casino Free will be out at the town meetings distributing fliers that beg the question: Can Philadelphia afford slots gambling? The fliers encourage questions like:

• Why haven't the Mayor and city officials conducted a cost-benefit analysis for the two proposed casinos?

• What are all the criminal justice and police costs associated with the proposed casinos?; and

• What is the expected impact on employment – and why did PICA report concerns about possible net job losses in the area?

Look for the fliers at the next town meeting and consider coming to CFP's Wed. Dec. 3rd meeting at Liberty Resources, 714 Market Street, 6 p.m. to hear more. We may not be able to afford not to.