MARK SMITH MORE COLUMNS Advertisement

You'd think it would be a no-brainer, even for Gov. Jim Gibbons.

The owners and operators at some of the legal brothels in the state have actually said they wouldn't mind being taxed.

One of the girls here at the Chicken Ranch even backed that up herself, telling one reporter, "I'd like to see us helping out."

The bill in question, filed by Las Vegas state Sen. Bob Coffin, would charge the brothels $5 for every sex act.

There are 25 brothels in the state, every one brand spankin' legal, and the state is facing a shortfall in revenues of more than $2.8 million.

I mean, watch the news, people. This economic problem is being hailed as a the worst situation the country has faced since the Great Depression. The TEA Party people ought to be flogging Coffin's brothel bill for all its worth.

But the likelihood of the brothel bill reaching the floor of either house for an open vote? "No chance" is the way one observer has put it.

Now prostitution has been legal in the rural counties for 30 years. Legal as Walmart. Legal as Smith's and Albertson's. Legal as Saddle West.

And not one dime in taxes has been collected in all those years.

Psychologist and prostitution researcher Melissa Farley sneered at the idea for taxes on what working girls do "legislative pimping."

Somehow I doubt if she's against collecting taxes on beer and booze (that's not "alcoholic pimping"?) and tobacco products, or for that matter on any products sold over the counter. That's probably all right -- that's a sales tax.

But to do so on legal prostitutes would be "pimping."

I know what I'd call Farley's point of view, and it rhymes with "rap."

LA Times writer Ashley Powers is probably right on when she remarks, "Here's Nevada's dirty little secret -- Many lawmakers would like to keep the state's legal brothels a dirty little secret."

And yet, when Pahrump discussed "branding" the town last year, the gentleman running the session asked what the first thing is that comes to mind when the subject of Pahrump is brought up.

At least three or four people barked out, "The brothels," followed by laughter. It was several moments before anyone mentioned anything else.

Dirty little secret, my foot.

Gibbons was asked about the brothel bill and came up with the usual sort of silliness. "So by taxing it," he said, "there's a recognition of the legality of it."

Whaaaaat? It's the sort of nonsense that would have delighted Hunter S. Thompson.

So by not taxing it, Mr. Governor, we can pretend it's illegal? Isn't that what we did for years where Red China was concerned, deciding that it was really the People's Republic of China only after our leading anti-Communist paid a visit to Beijing?

I'm thinking, anyone who runs for governor or the state Legislature ought to be pinned down on prostitution.

If they accept it as a legal business -- that is, if they "recognize" it -- fair enough. But if they don't, they ought to be asked bluntly, "How soon are you going to draft a bill that will render it illegal?"

"Ah ... ah ... ah ... Can you repeat the, ahem ... the, uh ... question?"

All things considered, if I were, say, a school administrator, I'd be on my knees, begging Gibbons to throw his weight behind Coffin and his brothel bill. We're talking about nearly $3 million in new revenue that is supported by those to be taxed for it.

But then, that assumes the governor has any weight to throw around anywhere.

Or any sense of reality.