By Dick Miller
WE.CONNECT.DOTS: In the national political spectrum, Ohio and Pennsylvania share commonalities.
Both are battleground states in Presidential campaigns. Yet Republicans decidedly control both state governments and send far more federal lawmakers to Washington who caucus with the GOP.
That Party’s bosses in both states are smarter and aggressive in political battles, easily cancelling out large registration deficits.
If there is a challenge to the actions taken by these Republican officeholders, fear NOT. That party has also won a majority of the judicial offices and these judges will likely rule in their favor.
None of the above helps explain why Ohio is on the verge of making the boldest state advancement in the legalization of marijuana while Pennsylvania strains its collective government brains dealing with strategies that will satisfy everyone.
Ohio is a referendum state; PA is not. More than likely, if some PA voters want a new program, end an old one or just update, they must go through their lawmakers.
The referendum process in Ohio seems to empower their citizens with more command of their own destiny.
They frame an issue, gather up signatures to direct the matter to come before the voters and presto! The world changes a bit . . . or not.
In the Keystone State, versions of various bills dealing only with medicinal use are bouncing back and forth between the House and Senate while the PA Medical Association thinks about holding an endorsement vote.
Passing two questions on Tuesday’s Ohio ballot would pave the way for both medicinal and recreational marijuana.
Ohio could become the fifth state (Colorado, Washington, Oregon and Alaska plus District of Columbia) to permit both usages and the first to attempt to permit them both simultaneously.
Proponents say passage of these constitutional amendments could eventually create 10,000 jobs and $0.5 billion annually in taxes for Ohio and local governments.
Ohio’s proposal to legalize medicinal and recreational use of marijuana in a unique fashion. Follow-up legislation would authorize creation of only ten large weed farms in already designated locations in Ohio.
Ten business groups have posted $2 million each to control these sites. Supporters claim such a business structure would keep marijuana growth and sales in check until a multitude of problems are resolved.
Polls show the issue is a dead heat in Ohio. Polling is less accurate in a low-turnout election such as 2015, however.
Legalizing marijuana for either medicinal or recreational use has strong social appeal, but also is lucrative to cash-starved governments.
Marijuana is where to go when voters will no longer stand another gambling or lottery program and increases in sales, property or income taxes never were on the table.
Support or opposition to legalizing marijuana weakens conventional political alliances. In Ohio, Chambers of Commerce registered strong opposition along with law enforcement, but neither faction is solid.
Conversely, tea party people like the additional revenues marijuana will reap while reducing the number of people arrested and imprisoned for possession.
Bottom Line: Employers see open use of marijuana as a minefield for new social and legal problems. Conflicting Federal laws hamper trending reliance on state laws and processes.
If there is to be a huge social and cultural shift as it applies to legalization of marijuana, don’t expect adjustments to come together smoothly.
Look for the pace of discussion on legalization of marijuana increase in Harrisburg as various other states report.
