Last Aug. 28, Gov. Pat Quinn explained why he was vetoing an ethically challenged gambling expansion bill: "We're not going to have loopholes for mobsters in Illinois. ... My two predecessors, who are in jail, did not focus on ethics."

Quinn has had an uneven record as governor, but with that veto he did right by the people of Illinois. The 2012 bill was an effort to foist on this state more gambling than citizens want, with less stringent regulation than expansion will require. The bill continued a sorry tradition in which deal-cutters in the General Assembly bank sweet donations from gambling interests, then write legislation to vastly expand the industry's footprint.

Expect the deal-cutters to propose another expansion bill during the Legislature's upcoming session. But having vetoed the 2012 expansion bill, and while now awaiting a 2013 expansion bill, Quinn needs to veto ... a 2011 expansion bill that Senate President John Cullerton finally is sending to the governor.

Yes, we know. Only in Illinois.

In May 2011, lawmakers passed a 409-page bill even more dreadful than their 2012 effort would be. The 2011 bill would have legalized a Chicago-owned casino but would have undermined regulatory oversight: Chicago's City Hall would have regulated all contracting, hiring and other nongambling operations at City Hall's casino. One provision banned the Illinois State Police, an agency that helps the Illinois Gaming Board regulate existing casinos, from helping keep Chicago's casino free of criminal influence. An internal Gaming Board analysis of the 2011 bill — it came to the Tribune editorial board from a source outside the agency — warned that, unlike the four-year licenses granted to other casinos, the Chicago license would be perpetual — "impossible for the Gaming Board to suspend or revoke" if, say, mobsters got a foothold.

And on and on. The unmistakable theme: So what if Gaming Board investigators on several occasions have intercepted mob intrusion attempts at Illinois casinos. Chicago gets to regulate itself.

The Tribune's revelation of that damning analysis stiffened Quinn's opposition to the bill. Cullerton, fearing Quinn's veto, had put a brick on the bill rather than send it to Quinn.

On Oct. 17, 2011, Quinn announced that if Cullerton ever did send him the 2011 bill, he would veto it. So the bill sat, until last week. At the end of the expiring General Assembly, Cullerton cleared off his desk and sent the measure to Quinn. And on Friday, Quinn spokeswoman Brooke Anderson assured us that the governor will follow through on his 2011 threat.

That is, Quinn will veto a 2011 bill worse than the 2012 bill he's already vetoed.

We've long supported an expansion more modest than these proposals that roughly would have tripled the number of gaming positions statewide. We share Mayor Rahm Emanuel's wish for a Chicago casino — provided it's regulated by a Gaming Board with the power and resources to regulate it tightly. But Emanuel and Quinn need to find a vehicle other than these oafish, overstuffed bills that sponsors of gambling legislation keep writing to please lobbyists and donors.

Among the ugly secrets of these bills: They would bring Illinois far less revenue than the sponsors admit. On Dec. 28, the Tribune's Bill Ruthhart reported that the 2012 bill, with five new casinos plus slots at six horse tracks, would do more to boost casino profits and increase revenue for local governments than to shore up state finances. Projections Ruthhart had requested from the state's nonpartisan Commission on Government Forecasting and Accountability showed that while an expansion of that magnitude would double the gross revenues of casinos and the taxes they pay to local governments, state government's total take would increase by a paltry 19 percent. That's largely because, in order to pass their big bills, the sponsors lard them with tax cuts, tax breaks and other costly giveaways.

Governor Quinn, bury the 2011 bill next to its 2012 sibling. We never leave home without the well-crafted "Framework for Gambling in Illinois" that you issued in October 2011. We even keep it online for our readers, at chicagotribune.com/gambling. Again, Governor, we thank you for working to protect the integrity of legalized gambling. Illinois is never more than one organized-crime scandal away from drying up this revenue stream.

Mayor Emanuel, yes, you need a Chicago casino. What you need first is a fresh approach. Relying on the usual suspects in the Legislature to include Chicago in another of their doomed megabills is a losing bet. Join us in asking what now is the most urgent question: Doesn't anybody know how to write a sensible bill to modestly expand gambling in Illinois?

Mr. Mayor, Quinn says there will be no gambling expansion until legislators pass pension reforms. You can take that as an obstacle or an opportunity. Either way, you need some new casino games.