Once again, an entrepreneur is spinning the wheel, asking Maine voters for an exclusive license to operate games of chance in Oxford County.

On Nov. 2, voters will consider a petition for a change in state law to allow table games and slot machines at a resort casino.

The jobs and the revenue projected by the would-be developers are far from a sure thing. This question represents nothing more than the calculated self-interest of the developers, and has been expressly opposed by the governor and Legislature. It strikes us absolutely wrong to allow prospective casino owners to write their own gambling laws.

Accordingly, we recommend a “No” vote on Question 1 on the state ballot.

Black Bear Entertainment, with the help of an out-of-state casino operator, hopes to establish a four-season resort in the town of Oxford. It anticipates creating hundreds of new jobs in a region where unemployment is relatively high.

But along with the promised benefits of gambling, come inevitable problems. The economics of the business require that people lose money, and some of them lose big. The individual and family problems that such losses cause should be a matter of public concern, especially in difficult times.

Also, since Black Bear Entertainment is promising the state economic benefits in return for its gambling license, voters should try to calculate the economic prospects of a casino in western Maine. Gamblers in the region already have other options for table games and slot machine action, and there’s a strong appetite to introduce casino gambling in Massachusetts and New Hampshire.

One measure of the limited market for gambling is the opposition from Hollywood Slots and the Bangor Region Chamber of Commerce. Stipulations within Question 1 would also complicate the effort to establish a racino in Biddeford. Although gambling proponents argue that they hope to rake in the discretionary income of out-of-staters, it’s not likely that there is plenty of this money to go around.

Proponents argue gambling’s social costs and its risks to existing businesses are minimal. Unfortunately, Maine has never taken a comprehensive look at the positive and negative consequences of gambling. Nor has any planner considered how the state could extract maximum value from gambling at the least risk. This is the kind of groundwork that ought to be done before Maine allows the gaming industry to insinuate a greater presence here.

Question 1 is not a referendum on whether we are for or against gambling. It’s a one-time, take-it-or-leave-it offer that Maine voters should view with skepticism.

— Questions? Comments? Contact Managing Editor Nick Cowenhoven at nickc@journaltribune.com.