On Jan. 29, 2008, Democratic and Republican Party voters in Florida will pick their preferred contenders for president. During that same election, all Florida voters, whether party-affiliated or not, will also likely decide on a constitutional amendment that will give massive tax cuts to primary homesteaded property.

And Miami-Dade County voters might be presented a third referendum — whether or not to allow slot machines in county dog tracks, horse tracks and jai-alai frontons in about three years or so.

This will be a second chance for slot machines in Miami-Dade County. In 2005, Broward and Miami-Dade voters were granted permission, after a statewide vote, to decide if they wanted slot machines at pari-mutuel facilities outside of Native American reservations. After a last-minute offensive against slots by then-Gov. Jeb Bush and other local leaders, Miami-Dade voters narrowly rejected the referendum while Broward voters approved it.

But Bush is not the governor anymore. Charlie Crist is, and Crist, so far, seems more concerned with creating tax breaks for homeowners than with curtailing gambling.

Indeed so far, Crist has not vetoed legislation expanding gambling that the state Legislature approved. This includes laws removing limits in poker rooms and allowing dominoes in all properly licensed pari-mutuels. In Broward, pari-mutuels will soon be allowed a maximum of 2,000 slots instead of 1,500, as well as progressive slots. They also got a tax break of sorts — slot machines will only be hit with a 30 percent tax for education instead of the current 50 percent. Pending approval in special session is legislation for video lottery terminals. When and if slots and video lotteries are allowed in Miami-Dade County, any new regulations will likely apply to Miami-Dade pari-mutuel facilities as well.

When and if. Proponents of slot machines should remember they were previously defeated in Miami-Dade partly because they promised too much. For example, they pledged that taxes on slot machines would benefit education. What they neglected to explain was that the revenue would be distributed statewide in accordance with an already set formula for education revenue. When all is said and done, Leon County’s school district, with its lower cost of living and smaller school population, probably benefited more from Broward’s slot machines than Broward. The same will be true with Miami-Dade County Schools. They will get some benefit from revenue — but not a lot.

No, the main reason Miami-Dade County commissioners are toying with the idea of posing the question of slot machines in Miami-Dade is that they would be levying their own taxes on pari-mutuels. At a time when property tax revenue may shrink to near nothing, the estimated revenue of $238 million from slots is tempting indeed. And that money would come from visitors and residents who hope, beyond the odds, to get some cash.

Slot machines might well pass in Miami-Dade County, but proponents will need to resist the urge to promise the world.

Better to keep the argument simple: Gambling is already allowed in pari-mutuels; the slots will likely prevent Miami-Dade’s struggling pari-mutuels from closing (and taking their jobs along); the tax on slots will provide a marginal boost for public schools; and the taxes charged by local government will replace some operational revenue lost by property tax cuts.

But this will be hard in Miami-Dade County, where leaders like to exaggerate the good caused from new taxes. They would do well to remember they are dealing with an increasingly cynical population. Promise too much and county voters will roll their eyes, balk — and slots will go down in flames once again.