A report released Tuesday by Common Cause/Pennsylvania revealing the extent of casino industry contributions to state lawmakers and other elected officials, including Gov. Ed Rendell and Attorney General Tom Corbett, contains no bombshell revelations, although, understandably, to some people the amounts given might seem eye-opening.

High-powered gaming interests gave $4.4 million to state politicians from 2001 to 2008, the report says, and lawyers and lobbyists for the 14 casinos authorized by the General Assembly in 2004 gave an additional $12.3 million.

Regarding donations to political candidates, the sky's the limit in the Keystone State. Pennsylvania is one of only a handful of states having no limits. And, until new donation restrictions are imposed — if that ever occurs — the current donation system will remain and special interests will continue to command more than their fair share of lawmakers' and other state officials' attention.

As Common Cause official James Browning described the casino gambling situation to a Pittsburgh reporter, "The gaming industry now has a blank check when it comes to influencing elected officials."

The release of the Common Cause report provides a good opportunity to reflect on some of the latest developments tied to the state's casino gambling industry. Those developments should be of interest to people concerned or troubled about the direction of that industry.

On the issue of table games, for example, House Bill 21 would legalize those games. But state Sen. Jane Earll, R-Erie, who has introduced Senate Bill 711, which would impose a total ban on gaming industry contributions and make more than 30 other changes to the 2004 slots law, has made it known that she does not want her bill amended to include legalization of table games.

Earll said if the Democratic-controlled House tries to add table games to the bill, she will urge the Senate not to approve it.

The Erie senator is correct that table games are such a major change for casinos that there should be a full public vetting of that issue on its own.

Like in neighboring West Virginia in recent years, the decision on whether table games should be allowed at casinos should rest with the voters — by way of a statewide referendum or by voters in the counties where casinos are located.

In West Virginia, the decision was made on the county level.

With the gaming industry's current window for influencing state politicians by way of campaign donations, the industry's political contributions are tantamount to a down payment on eventual authorization of table games and perhaps changes to regulations on payouts and casino profits.

Also worth considering is that casino gambling revenues haven't provided great savings for property tax payers who, during the push for casino gambling, were promised significant reductions in those tax bills if slot machines came to the state.

With that experience, property owners should be suspect of claims that the addition of table games will provide much more tax relief.

Meanwhile, there are numerous people, including some from Butler County, who hold the opinion that, since table games were introduced in West Virginia, the casinos there have become less friendly to slots players. Translated: lower payouts and less chance of winning anything.

When the gambling house's take at the tables isn't up to expectations, the house can make up that revenue by tightening up payouts on slot machines.

Those who frequent Pennsylvania casinos might not care that Rendell, a strong casino backer, has received more than $1 million in gaming industry donations and that convicted ex-Sen. Vincent Fumo, D-Philadelphia, was second-highest with $400,000 in such contributions.

The gaming industry money also went to politicians such as former Rep. Mike Veon, D-Beaver, who received $42,600, and to Earll, the recipient of $2,000.

Corbett's campaign coffers benefited to the tune of $85,000.

It was in April that the ban on political contributions by in-state casino officials was struck down by the state Supreme Court. The 2004 slots law, upheld by that court in mid-2005, banned donations to politicians from in-state casino officials but not those based in other states.

Earll's proposed law to reinstitute a total contributions ban is a move in the right direction. Decisions should be made based on what's best for Pennsylvania and its people, not on money given to politicians' campaign war chests.

The Common Cause report is just a fragment of a large, complex picture. The bottom line is that state residents should demand the final say in the state's important decisions regarding the casino industry, such as table games.

Political contributions shouldn't be the foundation from which such decisions are made.