This page recently, reluctantly recommended that Missouri voters approve legalized sports betting in the state by passing Amendment 2 on the Nov. 5 ballot. The reluctance was primarily due to the overly generous terms for the sports and gambling industries, including a tax rate that should be higher. But with a paralyzed state Legislature incapable of securing a better deal for the taxpayers from a market that is already thriving all around us, the ballot measure is the only deal available.

Amendment 5 is a much easier bet to place: It would authorize a 14th casino in Missouri on the Osage River in the Lake of the Ozarks area, to be taxed at the much higher rate already paid by the state’s 13 existing casinos, with the money earmarked for early childhood literacy programs. We recommend its passage.

If that recommendation comes with less reluctance, it’s not with enthusiasm. Gambling isn’t an ideal way to augment state revenue. But — as we’ve noted in this space many times before — Missouri, like the rest of America, long ago settled the debate over whether to allow adults to legally place bets. The only issue still on the table is where and how to regulate and tax it to the most public good.

On that front, Amendment 5 makes sense, at least within the context of a state that has already surrendered to legalized gaming.

The uninitiated tourist who visits the Lake of the Ozarks region — built around what Politico once dubbed “America’s hardest-partying lake“ — might reasonably wonder how it is that there isn’t a casino there already. The naturally beautiful area of resorts, wineries and water fun is in essence a playground for grownups.

Why not lean into that, if it means generating more than $14 million a year (the state’s official estimate) for education?

That estimate is based on the fact that the proposed casino would pay the current standard gaming tax paid by the existing casinos of 21% on its adjusted gross revenues (wagers minus winnings). By comparison, the sports-betting market envisioned under Amendment 2 would pay just 10%, and would be able to first deduct certain expenses. So, again, Amendment 5 is a much better deal for the taxpayers.

Existing casino revenue for the state is earmarked for education. Amendment 5 specifies that the revenue generated by the 14th casino “shall only be appropriated to early-childhood literacy programs” in schools. That specificity may make it less likely the Legislature can get away with the shell game it has played with gambling revenue before, using it as an excuse to siphon off education funds from other sources.

In addition, the casino is also expected to generate about 500 construction jobs and as many as 800 permanent jobs.

Those employment and tax revenue numbers won’t be game-changing given the scope of Missouri’s state budget and economy, of course. But that’s not ultimately the point.

People are going to gamble. The taxpayers may as well benefit from that stubborn fact, while ensuring that the games are fair and that the purveyors provide resources for problem gamblers. Both issues are already addressed by the stringent state regulatory system under which the new casino would operate.

Contrast that to thousands of unregulated, illegal video gaming machines that for years have been allowed to operate openly in bars and gas stations all over the state: They contribute to societal gambling problems with no counteracting services, potentially cheating their players (Who knows?) and giving nothing back to the taxpayers.

As long as Missouri’s hapless political leaders continue letting those illegal games flourish at the behest of monied lobbyists, almost any regulated gambling enterprise that might draw away their customers is a plus for the taxpayers. Vote “yes” on Amendment 5.

Previous Post-Dispatch endorsements to date:

U.S. Senate from Missouri: Democrat Lucas Kunce.

Amendment 2 — Legalizing sports betting: Yes.

Amendment 3 — Restoring reproductive rights: Yes.

Amendment 6 — Court fees for sheriffs’ retirement fund: No.