Maine’s struggling economy and anger over taxes make a casino attractive, but a better deal should be negotiated.

We’re bleeding manufacturing jobs. We’re limping under the highest tax/income burden in the country. We’re starving with the fourth lowest incomes in the land.

But things could be worse, you know. We could lose our traditional hunting and fishing image to a casino.

Imagine if people in Connecticut discovered that everything in Maine doesn’t look like a scene from an L.L. Bean catalogue. Now, that would be serious.

“Maine: The way life should be,” say the signs at our border. And that may be true, so long as you cross in Kittery and stick close to Route 1 on your trip to Bar Harbor.

But a large number of Maine’s people live in Western Maine, in Central Maine, Down East or up in The County, and these are the folks pollsters say are most likely to vote for a casino or “racino” on Tuesday.

Desperate, angry people do desperate, angry things – like pass referendums. (Arnold! Arnold! Arnold!) And desperation and anger have left many Mainers willing, even eager, to gamble on a casino.

For people who have high-paying jobs and live in communities with growing populations and low unemployment rates, the casino seems risky and likely to change their L.L. Bean image of Maine.

For people working at Wal-Mart or in some other service industry “career” and trying to support a family, a casino job seems like a gamble on a better life.

If you are jobless or have gone from a well-paying mill job to clerking at an Irving station, even a risky change holds out the hope of shaking up the bleak status quo.

Still, referendums are a poor way to make laws, and these casino and racino proposals certainly demonstrate that.

The casino law is 32 pages and 7,750 words, all written by one of the nation’s top Indian-casino lawyers, Tom Tureen.

Who in in their right mind would agree to a 32-page contract without reading it? Without listening to a lawyer? Without negotiations?

Perhaps one Mainer in a thousand has actually read the proposal. The state’s top lawyer, the Attorney General, says the document is confusing and full of holes. And, finally, there were and never will be any negotiations, just an up-or-down, yes-or-not vote on Tom Tureen’s vision of a great casino deal.

If you vote for a casino or a racino Tuesday, you will be waving good-bye to a valuable state asset without study, bidding or negotiations – and without good options for changing the deal for at least 20 years.

If you owned a large wood lot, would you let another guy write the contract to cut logs without knowing the value of those trees or without seeking competitive bids?

That’s what will happen if the casino or racino issues pass Tuesday. If we are lucky, they will not.

If we dodge this bullet, Gov. John Baldacci should awake Wednesday morning, thank God and then admit four things:

1. Our current economic development strategy in Maine has failed. No matter how you slice it, life is getting worse and worse in most parts of the state.

2. Maine’s voters are increasingly angry about their eroding family incomes and increasing tax burden.

3. A casino in Maine is inevitable. Polls show gambling is losing its stigma and millions of healthy, non-compulsive people see it as a pleasant weekend or vacation activity.

4. Finally, with its tourist economy, a casino would actually enhance Maine’s tourist-destination status.

Like it or not, a casino will one day come. Gov. Baldacci and the Legislature can choose between managing events or being managed by them. They can make the best deal for a casino or have one thrust upon them.

Gambling is an asset for the state, a valuable asset. It could help bring in millions of dollars in revenue and prevent millions from flowing from Maine to casinos in Connecticut or to ones that are almost certain to be built in Massachusetts or New Hampshire.

The governor should convince the Legislature to put its own referendum on the ballot just to clarify the issue. Ask voters this: “Do you want a casino in Maine with the revenue used to reduce property taxes and support current government services?”

It will pass by a wide margin. This is, by the way, the sort of simple question referendums are actually useful for answering.

Second, hire a couple of the best lawyers in the country to help draft a casino proposal and put it out to bid. The goal should be to maximize control, accountability and revenue for tax reduction.

A casino can be a good thing for Maine, but the casino and racino deals on Tuesday’s ballot certainly are not.

Rex Rhoades is the executive editor of the Sun Journal. His e-mail address is [email protected].