Get Active Subscribe Support Us

COUNTY PROSECUTOR AGAINST ISSUE 1

On Nov.  5, a dangerous and overreaching constitutional amendment will come before Ohio voters.  This amendment is supported by interests with nearly unlimited financial resources. 

Citizens of Ohio will likely be buried under paid media advertising designed to convince Ohio's voters that this amendment will provide Ohio with a less expensive and more successful means of dealing with drug offenders.  I have read and studied the amendment and this is not the case. 

This amendment, designated as State Issue I, would give Ohio's drug users a constitutional right to avoid punishment for various drug-related crimes and mandate the courts to provide offenders with drug treatment.  It contains no provisions for treatment of offenders who need alcohol treatment. 

While the following organizations support the concept of drug treatment for offenders, these organizations, among others, are opposed to State Issue I:

Ohio State Medical Association, Ohio Hospital Association, Ohio Nurses Association, Ohio Association of Alcohol and Drug Abuse Counselors, Ohio Association of County Behavioral Health Authorities, Ohio Treatment Alternative to Street Crime Partnership, Ohio Council of Behavioral Health Care Providers; Urban Minority Alcoholism and Drug Abuse Outreach Programs in Ohio, Ohio Parents for Drug Free Youth, Alcohol and Drug Abuse Prevention Association of Ohio, Ohio Association of Residential Recovery Services, Ohio Alcohol and Drug Policy Alliance, Ohio Chapter of Mothers Against Drunk Driving; Ohio Council Against Family Violence, Fraternal Order of Police, Ohio Troopers, Buckeye State Sheriff's Association, Ohio Association of Chiefs of Police, Ohio Chief Probationers Association, Ohio Community Corrections Association; Ohio Chamber of Commerce, Ohio Farm Bureau, Federation of Independent Business, Ohio Association of Drug Court Professionals, Ohio State Bar Association, and County Commissioners Association of Ohio. 

I agree there is a need to treat people who use drugs.  However, I adamantly oppose a constitutional amendment that would mandate that help.  State Issue I would deprive judges of their discretion in making decisions involving treatment. 

While treatment is often ordered for offenders in drug possession cases, there are some for whom it is inappropriate.  This amendment would tie the hands of judges, preventing them from making that determination. 

It would mandate that a person with multiple convictions for possession of drugs before the effective date of the amendment be deemed a first-time offender.  There is no mandatory drug testing required under the amendment. 

In Preble County, my office has prosecuted a number of individuals for possession of drugs and other crimes, sometimes violent crimes, who are professional drug dealers or couriers who do not use the drugs they sell to our neighbors and children. 

Issue I would mandate treatment for those charged with these crimes, even if they are not addicted to or dependent upon drugs.  The amendment even goes so far as to mandate that violent felonies do not include armed robbery, kidnapping and some forms of rape, if the offender is charged with a drug possession offense as well. 

This means that if an offender were charged with kidnapping, armed robbery and a drug possession offense, the violent crimes could be ignored and the offender ordered into drug treatment for his punishment. 

Under current law, those who are caught possessing or using illegal drugs are routinely provided the opportunity for treatment through intervention in lieu of conviction, specialized terms of probation or ( in some counties ) drug courts. 

However, drug addictions are very difficult to overcome.  Denial is one of the stages of addiction.  Often the only thing that causes drug addicts to stick with the treatment program is the threat of incarceration. 

Under the proposed amendment, there is no meaningful way to ensure that offenders follow through with treatment because even if an offender is totally uncooperative with going to treatment, Issue I would prevent the court from ever sending the offender to jail for more than 90 days.  A trip to prison would be out of the question. 

Repeat offenders who have been before the courts multiple times for drug offenses will be able to file a motion for treatment and even if they never go to the first treatment session, the court would be barred from sending them to jail for more than 90 days, regardless of the possible statutory penalty for their criminal offense. 

The Ohio Constitution is not the place for legislation regarding drug treatment.  If this amendment were to pass and it did not work as intended, it could only be changed in the future by the passage of another constitutional amendment. 

This amendment is more than 6,500 words long -- longer than the entire U.S. 

Constitution.  The legislature should be the entity that determines modifications to drug treatment laws for criminal offenders, balancing their needs with the rest of the needs for funding from other deserving segments of our society. 

Further, the proposed amendment mandates the spending of millions of dollars for this program but provides for no sources of funding -- which means that this money will likely have to come from the state general fund at a time when the state budget is already in crisis and other programs are being cut. 

I urge you to read the fine print and study the loopholes in State Issue I, then urge your friends, family and neighbors to help keep our community safe from illegal drugs and their results by voting against this proposed constitutional amendment.