Pubdate: Wed, 23 Sep 2015
Source: Columbus Dispatch (OH)
Copyright: 2015 The Columbus Dispatch
Contact:  http://www.dispatch.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/93

ISSUE 2: YES ISSUE 3: NO

Ohioans Should Prevent Opportunists From Hijacking State Constitution

Regardless of where one stands on the merits of legalizing marijuana, 
there is a bigger issue on which those on opposite sides of the 
question ought to be able to agree: The Ohio Constitution should not 
be surrendered to any group of greedy opportunists out to get rich by 
creating a monopoly business for themselves.

Regardless of where one stands on the merits of legalizing marijuana, 
there is a bigger issue on which those on opposite sides of the 
question ought to be able to agree: The Ohio Constitution should not 
be surrendered to any group of greedy opportunists out to get rich by 
creating a monopoly business for themselves.

This is why The Dispatch urges readers to vote yes for Issue 2, which 
would bar deep-pocketed special interests from using the Ohio 
Constitution for self-dealing purposes, and to vote no on Issue 3, 
which would create a business monopoly for a small group of investors 
that, once enshrined in the constitution, would be very difficult to change.

It simply is wrong, unfair and against the best interests of most 
Ohioans for wealthy outsiders to use the referendum process to cut 
themselves a sweetheart business deal. Even those who think marijuana 
use should be legal should recognize that Issue 3 is a bad deal for 
Ohioans. Why on earth should select business people be able to write 
state law that bars others from entering the market and sets their 
own favorable tax rates? What business wouldn't like to be able to 
keep everyone else out and decide how much it will pay in taxes?

Business regulations and major changes in state law, especially when 
it would contradict federal law, should be dealt with by the 
legislature, not decided at the ballot box based on whoever has the 
money to mount a high-profile campaign. Gambling operators cut 
themselves a similar deal several years ago by spending big money to 
legalize casinos in Ohio.

As with Issue 3, legalize is a tricky word: what it really means for 
these well-heeled business interests is "legal for me, but not for 
thee." Under Issue 3, even the bartering and trading of homegrown 
marijuana would be illegal.

ResponsibleOhio, the group spending millions of dollars to push 
legalization in hopes of gaining a financial windfall, has tried hard 
to disguise what it really is doing, portraying itself as being on 
the side of "rights" and "freedoms" while misleading the public about 
Ohio's already-lenient marijuana laws.

As Ohio Auditor Dave Yost points out, Ohio was one of the first 
states in the 1970s to decriminalize simple possession of marijuana. 
Someone can possess up to 100 grams, enough to make about 200 joints, 
and be hit with only a maximum fine of $150. That makes it a 
less-serious offense than littering in Ohio, Yost says.

ResponsibleOhio tried hard to change the ballot language on Issue 3 
to remove the word monopoly and to scuttle the term recreational use 
of marijuana in favor of personal use. After all, personal conjures 
up an adult exercising freedom of choice, doing something in private 
that doesn't affect others. And monopolies are the opposite of that: 
taking away others' freedom while granting special privileges to a select few.

The Ohio Supreme Court wisely ruled that those terms accurately 
described the effect of Issue 3.

When someone says an issue is about freedom, it's often really about 
money - especially if millions are being spent to influence votes. 
When Ohioans go to the polls, they should vote yes on Issue 2, and no 
on Issue 3 to ensure fairness for all and prevent misuse of the Ohio 
Constitution by special interests.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Jay Bergstrom