Debate on State Issue 1 Wednesday at Vindy, Vindy.com

SEE ALSO: Jail not the answer to Ohio's drug addiction crisis

• Issue 1 could make Ohio substance abuse magnet

A reading of the two Op-Ed articles on State Issue 1 on last Sunday’s Vindicator Commentary page, leads to the conclusion there’s no middle ground when it comes to the push to lessen criminal penalties for drug possession. (If you didn’t read the articles, visit the links above.

Indeed, the statewide ballot issue in the Nov. 6 general election is creating a huge firestorm because proponents want to etch in stone changes to current drug-sentencing laws. Passage would amend Ohio’s Constitution.

Therein lies the crux of the debate that’s raging across the state.

Is State Issue 1 the kinder, gentler answer to the

exploding drug-addiction crisis, as advocates contend? Or, will the constitutional amendment, if approved by voters, make Ohio a haven for drug pushers, addicts and others, as opponents charge?

Those questions and others will form the basis of an hourlong debate Wednesday morning at The Vindicator featuring four very knowledgeable, high-powered individuals who are

eager to do battle.

Confirmation of the two participants who will argue in favor of State Issue 1 had not been received by the time this column went to press. Their names will be included in the promotions of the debate on Vindy.com.

Urging a “No” vote on the constitutional amendment will be Chief Justice Maureen O’Connor of the Ohio Supreme Court and Judge John Durkin of Mahoning County Common Pleas Court.

The debate will be aired live on Vindy.com, where the live-video player will appear below the main photo on the home page. Click on the player to start.

Livestream simulcasts will be accessible on The Vindicator’s Facebook page as well: facebook.com/thevindicator.

The debate will begin at 10 a.m. and last an hour.

A panel of Vindicator writers will pose questions.

Given the growing public interest in Issue 1 – statewide candidates are also weighing in – The Vindicator will solicit questions and comments from viewers and listeners. They can be posted on the paper’s Facebook page.

To understand what’s at stake, consider this: Large amounts of out-of-state money are being spent on the campaign for passage. Among the major contributors is billionaire Mark Zuckerberg, Facebook’s chief executive officer.

The ACLU of Ohio has also endorsed Issue 1, saying, “Locking people in a cell does not address

addiction or the underlying factors that cause people to use. We are in the midst of an opioid epidemic and our prisons are at 132 percent capacity. We need to do something. We’ve needed to do something. Issue 1 is the solution.”

Proponents contend that a “Yes” vote on Issue 1 will mean safer communities, aggressive prosecution for violent crimes, and available treatment for addiction.

Not so fast, says Robin Weaver, president of the Ohio State Bar Association.

Here’s Weaver’s comment after the association

announced it is joining Ohio’s judges, prosecutors and others in the criminal justice system in opposing Issue 1:

“We firmly believe that treatment and rehabilitation are the right strategies for curbing Ohio’s opiate crisis and have seen them working in drug courts around the state. However, when you categorically strip our judges of their discretion and take away an important tool – the threat of prison time – you significantly lower the chances that they will get sober, enroll in and complete a drug treatment program.

“Make no mistake, by removing accountability for defendants and shifting the cost burden to local governments, this proposal will set Ohio back, and because it would be written into the Ohio Constitution, it will take years and significant resources to fix.

“We understand and share the sense of urgency of Issue 1 proponents, but our time would be better spent working together through the legislative process to expand and promote the use of drug courts and treatment in lieu of conviction. We urge all Ohioans to vote NO on State Issue 1.”

As the battle is joined, Wednesday’s debate at The Vindicator, the first one in the state, takes on greater importance.

For a sense of what to expect, consider these highlights from last week’s Op-Ed articles written by Chief Justice O’Connor and Dennis A. Baker, a former prison warden at several Ohio prisons.

Here’s what O’Connor wrote that has sent shockwaves through many communities, especially those in the grips of the opioid crisis:

“Issue 1 would mandate that the possession of powdered fentanyl in amounts less than 20 grams as a misdemeanor, and it would forbid judges from imposing jail time. Since the lethal dose of fentanyl is just 2 milligrams (one-thousandth of a gram), 19 grams of fentanyl could kill approximately 10,000 people. This offender, charged with possession of 19 grams of fentanyl, would automatically only get probation. It would be constitutionally dictated that any drug possession conviction that is now a Felony 4 or Felony 5 must be reduced to a misdemeanor. And, the judge must then sentence the offender to probation for these offenses under Issue 1. This is unconscionable.

“The lack of consequences for fentanyl possession also applies to possession of other lethal substances (cocaine, K2, meth and heroin, etc.). Current possession felonies become misdemeanors.

“What criminals wouldn’t want to set up their drug business in Ohio?”

In his article, Baker rejected the claim of opponents that Issue 1 would open the floodgates to illegal drug activity. Here’s what he wrote, in part:

“Contrary to what critics say, Issue 1 maintains Ohio’s numerous felony statutes to prosecute people preying on communities – from drug trafficking; to possession of criminal tools; to permitting drug abuse; or, corrupting others with drugs and more, even when quantities possessed are small. Possessing drug amounts large enough to harm hundreds of people is trafficking and these offenders face many years behind bars.”

The stage is set for what could be one of the most highly charged debates in this election season. The pro and anti forces aren’t pulling any punches in appealing to the voters of the state of Ohio.

Wednesday’s debate on Vindy.com will give the public a greater understanding of what’s at stake Nov. 6.