Our friend Chuck Muth has predicted the end of Gov. Jim Gibbons’s governorship should he abandon his no-new-tax pledge. Apparently, Muth says that’s the only thing keeping some conservatives in the Gibbons camp, and without it, the guv is toast.

Which, of course, would be cool with us.

Muth is complaining because Gibbons apparently tried to get some much-needed wiggle room in the pledge, by saying that if the Legislature were to ask voters to raise the room tax by 2 percent in order to fund education, and the voters said yes, Gibbons would go along with the deal. (By that, we presume he means sign such a bill into law at the 2009 Legislature.)

But according to the official pledge Gibbons signed (parked on the Americans for Tax Reform site under “take the governor’s pledge”) he’s obligated to “oppose and vote against veto any and all efforts to increase taxes.” Ergo, were he to agree to even a voter-approved deal, Muth says, he’d be breaking his word.

Now, we can’t argue this point. Muth is right: Gibbons would most definitely be breaking this pledge if he agreed to any deal to raise taxes, even with voter OK. There’s no getting around that. And to the extent there are political consequences, Gibbons would suffer them. (Then again, considering he’s suffering the consequences of being generally incompetent and unfit for office in the first place — yet, still hanging around — he may yet be able to endure anything!)

But we are also compelled to point out that the governor has made his position on voter-authorized tax increases plain, and he did it long ago. Consider this quote, from a Review-Journal story back on March 11, 2007, discussing taxes for transportation:

Four weeks ago, Gibbons said he would not object if legislators put a question on the ballot asking voters to decide whether they should tax themselves to construct roads.

“If the public wants to implement a tax on themselves, that is up to the voting public,” he said. “A vote of the public will supersede a governor’s reluctance to raise taxes.”

Yes, by the way, Muth objected to that idea at the time, too. But it seems to us that a direct vote of the public is the surest way to tell whether a tax has broad public support or not. And, we must add, there is even a provision in the Gibbons Tax Restraint Initiative (which forces the Legislature to get a two-thirds vote to raise taxes) to allow the public to enact a tax by a simple majority.

So it seems Gibbons has long believed in direct democracy when it comes to raising taxes. And that, we think, is a good thing.

We’re not sure what the prospects are on the 2 percent room tax (it’s contemplated as an alternative to the increase in the gross gambling tax touted by the teacher’s union). We doubt it will come to pass, since there are several hurdles in the way. But if it does, and if Gibbons signs off on it provided the people say yea, then we think the governor should get some slack.

Even if he is violating a pledge, albeit one he should probably never have taken in the first place.