The campaign for an Oxford County casino has destroyed our faith in the good idea behind it: an economic engine in one of Maine’s distressed rural counties, bringing needed jobs and tax revenue.

The rhetoric of the casino campaign has been simplistic and spiteful – the campaign will only talk about jobs, and attacks anybody who disputes this assertion or raises other topics.

Meanwhile, their glaring weakness – the bloated legislation – is dismissed with a casual “we’ll fix it” or allusions to whitewashing with gallons of corrective fluid. Voters can’t afford to be so cavalier.

The carpenter’s principle of “measure twice, cut once,” applies here. Maine can hold out for a casino proposal that doesn’t originate from what’s universally thought to be a truly terrible bill.

We urge a “no” vote on Question 2, the Oxford County casino.

In many ways, this endorsement is a shame. Oxford County needs an economic spark, due to decline in traditional industries. Any entity wishing to spend $100 million or more, and employ 800 or more, is welcome.

A casino is welcome, for the reasons we endorsed the Washington County racino last year. “Maine has traveled past where legal gambling is a question,” we said. “The time for debating the merits of … gambling in Maine is over.”

But this casino, with its sketchy beginnings, silent partners and crazed campaigning has not proven its worth. On Friday, after years of waiting, the media assembled in Oxford to be told, as promised, the casino site.

None was forthcoming. Instead, the announcement was about narrowing prospects along Route 26. If we cannot trust the press releases of this campaign, how can we trust its promises about fixing the legislation?

It’s not like Olympia Gaming has a reputation in Maine. It arrived weeks ago, after buying the remnants of Seth Carey’s Evergreen Mountain Enterprises, then jumped on the stump of jobs and money, money and jobs.

That’s what Carey promised, too. But the promises of this casino pale against the reality of its legislation.

The legislation drops Maine’s gambling age to 19, bestows a 10-year monopoly and instant political power to the company, and removes the restriction on the number of registered slots in the state.

It may also allow the casino to extend credit to gamblers. Some say it does; the casino says it doesn’t.

At best, this is ambiguous. Voters can’t know for sure.

Maine must confront gambling eventually. The state’s regulation of this industry needs funds and staff. The desire of interests to bring gambling to Maine is insatiable. Which is fine. As long as the legislation approving a casino is sensible and fair, unlike this one.

In lieu of this bad bill, we urge Olympia to make its own pitch to Maine lawmakers. They should forget fixing what’s broken and push forward on a good piece of lawmaking.

What’s before voters now is inappropriate. It was penned by an inexperienced, idealistic young attorney to save the world, starting with his hometown of Rumford – not for the voters of Maine.

Vote “No” on Question 2.