Don’t ignore the facts in campaign to legalize marijuana

By Ian James

Special to The Vindicator

I am writing in response to last Sunday’s column by Bertram de Souza, “An attack on reefer madness?” While I appreciate the attention to the topic of marijuana legalization, there was a significant amount of misinformation that I feel compelled to address.

ResponsibleOhio is working to legalize marijuana for both medical and personal use by Ohioans 21 years of age and older. Our amendment, if passed by voters, would create a safe, legal market for marijuana. We predict the industry will generate hundreds of millions of dollars in new tax revenue for our communities, create thousands of jobs and smother Ohio’s black market.

Auditor Dave Yost raised an important question: Will criminals be allowed to own businesses in the marijuana industry? The answer is a resounding “no.”

No convicted felons

Contrary to Auditor Yost’s opinion, any person seeking to own and/or operate a marijuana business will need to pass a criminal background check. The amendment clearly states that these entrepreneurs cannot have been convicted of a felony within the previous five years. Should voters approve this initiative, the Marijuana Control Commission will require all owner-operators to undergo a criminal background check, and they will refuse to grant licenses to anyone who cannot meet the criminal background check requirements.

This commission will be a seven-member body appointed by the governor and drawn from a variety of fields – law enforcement and public policy, to name just two. It will be independent and will have strict authority over the state’s legal marijuana industry. ResponsibleOhio will not be conducting oversight of this industry – an independent watchdog will hold the entire industry to high standards and enforce strict penalties for any violations.

To put it in layman’s terms: Criminals will not own Ohio’s legal marijuana businesses, and the Marijuana Control Commission will enforce these standards. Suggesting otherwise is a disservice to voters.

Auditor Yost also contends that legalizing marijuana would only “benefit a few.” That is simply untrue. The passage of Responsible- Ohio’s amendment will result in creation of an entirely new industry. Thousands of Ohioans will have the opportunity to own and operate retail and medical marijuana dispensaries. When you consider the potential growth in retail, health care, manufacturing and testing facilities, these new employers will hire over 10,000 Ohioans to run their operations.

Auditor Yost’s claim about who will benefit makes even less sense when you consider the incalculable costs of our state’s failed marijuana prohibition. Ohio is spending over $120 million per year enforcing laws that have not made us safer. That figure pales in comparison to the human cost of our over-incarceration, particularly of low-income and minority Ohioans, for marijuana- related crimes.

Power play

What is truly “offensive” is Auditor Yost’s attempt to manipulate the democratic process and take power away from Ohio voters. His proposal would only worsen the problem it claims to address by making it even harder for direct democracy to occur in the future.

The people of Ohio have the right to make choices for themselves. They should have the opportunity to weigh the merits not only of ResponsibleOhio’s proposal, but also future petition efforts. We’ve seen too many examples of partisan gridlock interfering with the will of the people. By making the process to the ballot even more difficult than it already is, Auditor Yost will virtually eliminate the opportunity for Ohioans to work together for collective change. It’s wrong. It’s undemocratic. And it would take rights away from voters.

Ian James is the executive director of ResponsibleOhio.