Jim Gibbons for governor.

He would be good for MGM Mirage, good for Station Casinos, good for business, they surely thought. He would be predictable, unlike state Senate Minority Leader Dina Titus. He wouldn't raise taxes, would leave them all alone.

It had to have seemed like a good idea at the time. But how about now, folks?

I would posit, almost without exaggeration, that whenever Gibbons decides to open his mouth for any length of time, all of these early backers have to be shaking their heads and saying...

Yes, it may have seemed like a good idea at the time. But it's about time some captain of industry stood up and said, "I think we bought a pig in a poke."

Consider that the Las Vegas Review-Journal this week ran a prominent story in which Gibbons was advocating for a revenue-shift plan that plays into all the fears southerners have about northerners. (Before going on, I stipulate that the story was in the R-J and I cannot vouch for its unerring accuracy.)

Renoite Gibbons floated the plan, which southerners who have been around have heard before, to raid local governments for money to help the state pay for its duties. Do the math here: Who pays a disproportionate share if such a plan were to be approved? Hint: It's not the governments of Lander, Lyon or Mineral counties - or even Washoe County. How convenient.

Yes, gentlemen and ladies, it seemed like a good idea at the time.

"Maybe we ought to be looking at the state's contribution to counties and cities," Gibbons told the R-J. "As you know, you have a property tax base here in the county that the state doesn't have. You need to look at that allocation once again to see whether or not we can mitigate this constant cyclic affair with the sales tax."

So the governor, who apparently also is the Rip Van Winkle of Nevada politics, has awakened to find that sales taxes fluctuate and that more than a quarter-century ago the Legislature based our revenue system on that source? And his solution is to stick the state's straw into the local government drink and slurp away until services down here suffer - services that serve businesses run by the people who put him in office?

But, but ... it seemed like a good idea at the time. I bet it did.

Look at what has come before, too.

Gibbons adopted the Sheldon Adelson plan - Gondolier Numero Uno must be the ONLY one here who doesn't have buyer's remorse - to divert room tax revenue to pay for state projects. But even more salient is that Gibbons' stubborn "no new tax" pledge has galvanized one special interest - the teachers union - and one special man - rabble-rouser Kermitt Waters - to fire up gaming tax initiatives that could have a slight impact on the bottom lines of the companies run by Mr. Lanni and the Fertitta brothers.

Seemed like a good idea at the time, did it, gentlemen and ladies?

I am sure many of the Gibbonsites remain Gibbonsites because he is hewing to his no-tax pledge and refusing to think very far into the future. But that myopia, while it may appeal to business folks who care only about short-term gains, will have disastrous consequences in the long run.

Maybe some of these people who backed Gibbons should have given Titus a chance. Maybe she would have raised taxes, but surely not much right away. And maybe she would have asked gaming and business to pay more, but I'd guess not a lot more. But Titus also would not have come up with four different budget plans and floated an idea anathema to anyone who understands the economy of Southern Nevada.

Dina Titus for governor.

Maybe that should have seemed like a good idea at the time.