Voting yes, because Cedar Rapids doesn't need a casino

So I guess I'm a yes on Tuesday.

That was tough to type. I've been putting it off. At one point, I toyed with the idea of keeping my vote to myself. But I figure you have to make up your mind. And I get paid to have opinions. So now I have one. Happy?

I'm sure some of you are not. Not happy at all. But before you curse me, or applaud, please consider the curious fact that my main reason for voting to allow gambling here would also make a very fine reason for voting no.

Basically, Cedar Rapids doesn't need a casino.

This is a town with a lot going for it. It has a remarkably diverse economy, anchored by a large and growing manufacturing sector, health care institutions, robust retail, finance and insurance businesses, etc. Mayor Ron Corbett remarked during his State of the City speech this week that the city's corn processors buy $2.8 billion worth of grain each year.

His speech was mostly about a city with growing economic confidence and a long list of new private investments. His speech had more than 4,800 words. “Casino” was not one of them. He did get asked about it afterward, and he supports it, but it wasn't part of his prepared pep talk. It didn't really need to be.

Sure, the casino's projected $80 million in annual revenue is real money. But, according to numbers compiled by the Cedar Rapids Area Economic Alliance, health care businesses in this town bring in nearly 10 times that amount. Retail tops $500 million. Finance and insurance earnings approach $700 million.

The casino's projected 362 jobs are nothing to sneeze at, but that wouldn't even dent the top 30 employers in the metro.

It's likely that redevelopment of Westdale Mall will eclipse the capital investment being made in the casino. Perhaps new retail and restaurant offerings at Westdale will cannibalize from gambling. Never can tell.

I haven't even mentioned New Bohemia, the new library, the convention complex, the amphitheater. Have you tried Cobble Hill, the great new restaurant downtown? You should. The Kernels are now the farm club for my beloved Twins. Very exciting.

My point is that this casino, if it happens, will be one more thing, one more division of a sector. In a city this size, and with an economy that already has so much going for it, gambling will be neither a savior nor a scourge. If these local investors think they can make some money tossing a casino into that economic stew, fine by me.

If this city was a sinking ship, and we were desperately grasping at gambling to save us, I'd vote no. If this were a much smaller metro, where a casino would dramatically shake its economy and change its civic identity, I'd vote no. If gambling wasn't a well-regulated and mature industry in this state, I'd vote no. If folks in other Iowa casino towns were voting to chase gambling from their communities, I'd oppose it here. But none of those scenarios apply.

Still, I'm not going to pretend I'm rock certain that I'm making a flawless call. I think the casino's charitable contributions percentage is too stingy. I worry about addiction, although, as I said last week, I think people are primarily responsible for the bad choices they make. And if those worries, or your moral compass, point you toward no, I can't blame you. Not one bit.

And if you accuse me of voting yes, at least partly, to keep a good story going, I'll have to plead the 5th.

I also have to say that the campaign waged by Just Say No Casino played a role in nudging me toward yes. Opponents can parse and protest all they want, but they're waging a campaign against gambling here paid for with the fruits of gambling being harvested outside the county. You say broad coalition. I say irreconcilable contradiction.

And their 11th-hour, Hail Mary pitch to build a water park in Cedar Rapids if the referendum fails seems too late in the game to be taken seriously

I understand that our elections nowadays are masquerade balls with campaigns and groups peddling messages that say one thing paid for with money that says something else entirely. That doesn't mean I have to support it.

And voting yes doesn't mean I'll shed even one salty tear if gambling is defeated Tuesday. I won't. Because we don't need it.