Pubdate: Sun, 08 Nov 2015 Source: Dayton Daily News (OH) Copyright: 2015 Dayton Daily News Contact: http://drugsense.org/url/7JXk4H3l Website: http://www.daytondailynews.com/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/120 Author: Thomas Suddes Note: Thomas Suddes is an adjunct assistant professor at Ohio University. MARIJUANA LEGALIZATION ISSUE WILL LIKELY RESURFACE Issue 3 - the proposed Ohio marijuana monopoly - suffered a jaw-dropping loss Tuesday. But that doesn't mean another Issue 3-like ballot issue won't surface again, maybe as soon as next year. That's despite such startling facts as the rejection of Issue 3 in all 88 counties, even party-hearty Athens. Likewise, the Western Reserve's liberal citadel, Oberlin, voted against Issue 3. For that matter, Issue 3 failed to carry one of the four precincts in tie-dyed Yellow Springs. Still, "it took the casinos five times" over almost 20 years to win Ohio voters' approval, said Statehouse mega-lobbyist Neil S. Clark. Among Clark's many lobbying clients is the ResponsibleOhio Political Action Committee, the outfit backing Issue 3. Ohio voters rejected gambling ballot issues in 1990 (a proposed Lorain casino); in 1996 (riverboat casinos); in 2006 ("learn 'n' earn" slot machines to fund college scholarships); and in 2008 (a proposed Wilmington casino). Then, in 2009, after Cavs' owner Dan Gilbert and Penn National Gaming Inc. spent $50 million on statewide ballyhoo, and then-Gov. Ted Strickland failed to propose a taxpayer-fair alternative, voters gave Gilbert and Penn National a four-casino Ohio monopoly. Clark, asked how likely another statewide marijuana ballot issue is in Ohio, said "90 percent." And he predicted one may surface "next year." Meanwhile, though, both Republicans and Democrats in the General Assembly are talking about legalizing medical marijuana. If they do so, that could deflate some of the potential oomph behind a future Issue 3. As for the Issue 3's tally when polls closed last week, Clark said it failed because turnout in Ohio's big cities was less than ResponsibleOhio had estimated. That may well be; indeed, Issue 3 only narrowly carried Cleveland - by about 52.9 percent. But Secretary of State Jon Husted said overall statewide turnout was greater than turnout for 2014's election, when Republican Gov. John R. Kasich walloped his Democratic challenger, thenCuyahoga County Executive Ed FitzGerald. In some ways, Issue 3's Tuesday "yes" vote was bigger than, by rights, it should have been. From the get-go, Issue's 3 ballot wording or "language," which (correctly) used the word "monopoly" to describe the marijuana set-up that Issue 3 proposed, was a voting booth handicap. Then there was Issue 3's perceived ban on all homegrown marijuana. Consider the vote in Meigs County, along the Ohio River, south of Athens. Accurately or not, marijuana farming is said to be something of a cottage industry in Meigs. Statewide, Issue 3 was rejected by 64 percent of Ohio's voters. In Meigs, 69 percent of the county's voters balked at Issue 3 - and in a several Meigs precincts, 77 percent did. Meanwhile, bystanders forgot that polling on ballot issues is trickier than polling on candidates. And polls are leaked for a reason (say, to cheerlead for a campaign). Moreover, some Issue 3 polling was simply not credible. Anyway, it's widely known that when Ohioans are faced with a complex ballot issue, they tend to vote "no." Issue 3 was plenty complex. A simple yes/no question on plain-vanilla marijuana legalization might have won. But something written in law-school pidgin? No way. Whether or not a new marijuana issue surfaces, other ballot issues will. They're becoming a Full Employment Act, especially in off-year elections, for political consultants, "strategists" and all the other pilot fish swimming in Ohio politics. That's why Ohio's "Californication" will continue - the packaging and advertising of big-ticket statewide ballot issues. Little wonder: Ballot-issues are one branch of politics where, like the plot gimmick in Mel Brooks's movie, "The Producers," even a flop could pay off - for insiders. - --- MAP posted-by: Jay Bergstrom