 Todd DormanTodd Dorman is a columnist for The Gazette. His blog has been bringing smiles to readers' faces since November 2007. |
|
Email the author
Will the margin matter?
Steve Gray (left) and Marcia Rogers (right) applause as they celebrate the passing of the Linn County gaming referendum appear on a large screen during a Vote Yes Linn County gathering at the IBEW Local 405 Hall on Tuesday, March 5, 2013, in southwest Cedar Rapids, Iowa. (Jim Slosiarek/Gazette-KCRG)
So Linn County casino backers scored a big 61-39 victory Tuesday. I was surprised, as I said previously.
But will that margin impress the Iowa Racing and Gaming Commission, which will have the final word on whether a Cedar Rapids casino plan gets a state license?
Well, clearly, it doesn’t hurt. In the last decade, only one casino license went to a county where a referendum passed with less than 60 percent of the vote. Palo Alto (Emmetsburg), Worth, Black Hawk and Lyon counties all cleared 60 percent. (Palo Alto and Worth actually cleared 70 percent) Only Riverside got a license after Washington County approved gambling with less than 60 percent, 52-48.
Wapello, Franklin, Webster and Tama counties approved gambling with voter support in the mid 50s. None received licenses.
Of course, many, many other factors played into those licensing sagas, the quality of plans, economics, etc. But it seems like crossing the 60 percent threshold is a good, maybe even necessary, first step. It’s also remarkable because the 2003 referendum here failed by 6 percentage points.
Turnout was high enough Tuesday to give the outcome some credibility. In 2003, just north of 58,000 Linn County voters cast ballots. This time, 60,267 voted, or just short of 40 percent of registered voters.
One big difference. In 2003, 4,846 absentee ballots were cast. This time it was 19,324.
Just Say No Casino lost 12,373 to 6,939 among those absentees and 24,503 to 16,452 (59.8-40.2) among voters who marched to the polls on a snowy election day.
Vote Yes Linn County won 82 of 86 precincts, including three where its support topped 70 percent.
But it wasn’t a landslide everywhere. In the precinct that votes at Marion’s Lowe Park in Marion, gambling prevailed 148-145. It was also very close at the Marion Public Library, with vote yes narrowly winning 214-210. In Cedar Rapids’ precinct 24, voting at Bethany Lutheran, the referendum squeaked through 417-404.
In my home precinct, voting at Marion’s Lutheran Church of the Resurrection, gambling carried the day 316-217.
Here’s a chart from the Racing and Gaming Commission showing referendum results over the last decade:
-u20042.png?1366232523)
Was fairly clear that it was going to pass, margin being the only question. Would say the 2008 flood played a role in this venture, real plans were probably started in 2009 and proceeded till the city buyout ended. The earliest this election could have taken place was late in 2011, as there needs to be 8 years between elections. That date didn’t make alot of sense as buyouts weren’t complete and city could still be investigated, on Oct. 25, 2012 city was free of any fraud charges in the buyouts, close to the date the campain really started rolling. A puzzle has many pieces that need to fit.
The thing that immediately jumps out at me when I look at this chart is how small the population is in most of these counties. No other county has come close to the 60,267 votes we had in Linn County.
I’m not familiar with the politics of this situation, but it seems like it will be hard for the gaming commission to deny this request.
Oh, I have no doubt this fix is already in on this…
What I find odd is the polling a week before the election showing a tight race, then suddenly the new poll shows a huge margin, then the election results are even more of a landslide…conviently getting the 60 margin needed to convince the commission. That kind of movement in a hotly contested race? Strange. And such a turn around in 8 short years! Too bad there wasn’t some exit polling or independent polling done. Of course, it could just be that the Yes campaign did a great job of targeting and activating degenerate gamblers, they were certainly all over the facebook page telling tales of who has the best slots and coupons they get and such. And why not? They already target them to keep them coming in and blowing the rent money. The State knows who they are! Blowing hard earned money to pull a lever, what fun! I’d rather join the monkeys flinging poo in the zoo. Well, it will take a year of so to get this up and going at least, time enough to prepare our home for sale. The one thing I can enjoy about this fiasco is the irony of a city council so bent on keeping the “riff raff” out of downtown….ha….enjoy your new “sin city” mayor!
Mina…you seem distraught….a zoo was never mentioned…but….but might be on the horizon….I really think why the margin changed was because of the promise to build a water park…and it was just that…a promise…no legal requirement…
Mina, who are you to tell others how to spend their money. If you don’t want to gamble, don’t gamble. I grow tired people who think they are smarter then everyone else and think they have a right to tell others what to do.
The NO campaign factored in here. I don’t gamble, so I didn’t really care if it was approved or not. However, I dislike people telling me what I can and can not do, and the NO campaign compelled me to vote yes. I think the NO campaign moved a lot of fence sitters to the yes side.
My aunt had both of her legs broken because of a bad habit with the ponies. That didn’t stop her. She lost her home and died homeless and penniless. I’m no smarter than she was Brad. I just don’t like to gamble. And I don’t want in my community so I will go elsewhere.
While gambling addiction is bad, so is alcohol, drug, sex, and every other addiction there is. People make bad decisions. We can not protect everyone from everything. Your aunt made bad choices, and suffered from them.
“And I don’t want [it] in my community so I will go elsewhere.” And that is the greatest thing about this country. Ultimately, you can vote with your feet.
There was a campaign by the “yes” side encouraging people to vote yes. You also had an incompetent campaign by the “no” side that pushed people to vote yes. Why would you be surprise by the outcome?