For the last five years, Mainers have debated the relative merits of casino gambling, and in two of three votes decided the risks outweighed the benefits. The exception is the $132 million Hollywood Slots racino facility in Bangor, which voters approved in 2003. The permanent racino facility, featuring 1,000 slot machines, a 150-room hotel and a 1,500-vehicle parking garage, opened this week to much fanfare, local and regional interest, and a small protest.

With the racino taking tangible form, there is an opportunity to lay to rest the speculation about the role it will play in the region. Boosters see it as an economic driver, drawing visitors in a spending state of mind from all over eastern, central and northern Maine and Maritime Canada. Critics foresee those who can’t afford to play at the gambling facility being seduced into big losses, which in turn will spawn marital and family disintegration, personal despair and crime.

Since Hollywood Slots is here in all its glory and not likely to go away, why not study its impacts in a comprehensive and scientific way? The nearby University of Maine – specifically its Center for Tourism Research and Outreach – is a likely candidate to do the work. Though Hollywood Slots is not obligated to cooperate, it should be urged to do so.

Some of the questions a survey should ask include: How many of the facility’s hotel rooms are filled on Aug. 15, Oct. 15 and Jan. 15? What about other Bangor area hotels? Is lodging up over last year? From which regions are patrons coming and how much are they spending at the racino and in other businesses? Can the facility draw conferences and other professional gatherings? Would it work synergistically with a new Bangor Auditorium? Is the draw hurting nearby tourist attractions and businesses? And what about costs – are accidents, OUIs, burglaries and domestic violence increasing?

The debate over on-site gambling in Maine will continue and will in fact move to the front burner of Maine politics this summer, since a referendum on the November ballot asks voters to approve a casino in Oxford County.

Though the vote tallies on the three proposals have not been close, no pundit can claim to be able to divine the Maine mind on casino gambling from the results thus far. Each of the three votes, and the fourth one that comes this fall, should be seen within a greater context. To date, three of the state’s four corners have been considered for gambling facilities. (Is Fort Kent next?) Two have been tribal proposals, bringing with them some degree of sympathy (or perhaps antipathy) for the American Indian economic plight. The one proposal winning voter approval, opponents say, came as the state was distracted by a larger project planned for southern Maine.

A study would not be completed in time for November’s vote, but it could quantify the true impact of casino gambling as it works in Maine, and perhaps pin down a cost-benefit perspective to inform future proposals.