AP: Ohio rejects Issue 3 to legalize marijuana

[NobodyHere]

Source: AP via WTOL

Issue 3 was rejected, according to the Associated Press. The issue would have allowed 10 companies in the state to grow and sell marijuana to manufacturers and 1,100 voter-approved retail stores. Sales and use of medical and recreational marijuana would be regulated by a Marijuana

Read more: http://www.wtol.com/story/30429697/ap-ohio-rejects-issue-3-to-legalize-marijuana

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

1. Issue 1, the redistricting one is going to win. Issue 2 is close, but still winning so far. nt

[OregonLiburl]

2. Forget the Pot bill (it was terrible IIRC) Gerrymandering gone

There is hope for our democracy. Gerrymandering now illegal in Ohio.
Take that Koch brothers.

[NobodyHere]

6. Keep in mind though that this doesn't directly affect congressional districts

Just districts for the state legislatures.

[blackspade]

3. I thought issue 2 was the Marijuana monopoly referendum?

Issue 3 was the blanket legalization referendum if I remember correctly.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

7. 2 was no initiatives for personal gain, 3 was monopoly pot.

Really, 3 had something in it for all sides to hate.

On the right, people could hate legal pot.

On the left, people could hate legal drug cartels to enrich fat cat investors.

[kristopher]

27. #2 Prohibit Market Monopolies ; #3 Legalize Recreational Marijuana

Issue - 2 - Prohibit Market Monopolies - General
November 03, 2015 - 10:56PM ET
Ohio - 7109 of 8905 Precincts Reporting - 80%
Name Votes Vote %
Yes 1,351,920 52%
No 1,241,740 48%
Issue - 3 - Legalize Recreational Mariju - General
November 03, 2015 - 10:56PM ET
Ohio - 7109 of 8905 Precincts Reporting - 80%
Name Votes Vote %
No 1,703,295 65%
Yes 930,936 35%

[blackspade]

29. Thanks, our local news apparently had them mixed up.

[dflprincess]

4. Do you think limiting the number of growers had anything to do with its defeat? nt

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

8. It's why I voted against it.

It was written solely to make a small group of people incredibly wealthy.

They want to simply put up 'legalize pot in Ohio', I'll vote for that.

[Bjorn Against]

9. I think that is the primary reason for the defeat

Many legalization supporters opposed this amendment because of the provision limiting who can grow it. I predict Ohio will legalize next year when a new initiative is voted on which does not include the monopoly provisions.

[dflprincess]

12. It will be interesting to hear if the media mentions the reason for the defeat

or if it will just imply that the good people of Ohio objected to grass and never mention that what they really don't like are monopolies.

[Comrade Grumpy]

54. Who is going to pay to gather 300,000 signatures?

Ohio activists have been trying for years to get an initiative on the ballot, and they haven't succeeded yet. And now, there's even less reason for people to start pouring money into the state to get weed on the ballot.

Ohioans just voted to maintain marijuana prohibition for the foreseeable future.

[Travis_0004]

10. Perhaps

But it went down hard.

I voted yes. What I don't get is issue 3 would have limited to 10 growers for 4 years. After 4 years, the state could add more.

People claim to be pro marajuana but voted it down. So no the alternative is maybe in 4 years, we will have a new law. In the mean time, let people with diseases suffer, and arrest people and lose out on tax revenue.

With it going down this hard, I don't see the point in trying again next year or anytime soon. If Ohio is against this bill 2-1, I don't see the point in donating or volunteering for future bills. Maybe we can try again in 5 years.

[jeff47]

16. Yes, it's so easy to displace monopolies after they're established.

[Travis_0004]

18. The bill allowed additional growers after 4 years

I dont smoke pot, so Im not worried. I just dont see how supporing the mexican cartel for the next couple years is a better option.

[jeff47]

21. Giving the monopolies a 4 year head start means they can not be easily displaced

They've got infrastructure, contracts, buildings and customers. They can undercut any new growers because the new growers still have to pay for those set-up costs.

And that's pretending there is not any underhanded behavior, like suppliers just "deciding" to only sell to the monopolies.

"After 4 years" is just cover. Even if the monopolies were not extended in the intervening 4 years, they would be so far ahead that they could crush any competition.

I just dont see how supporing the mexican cartel for the next couple years is a better option.

Yes, it's utterly impossible to write a different initiative that does not grant a monopoly for several years.

[Travis_0004]

23. thats fine

Lets give the mexican cartel more money, let people qho need marajuana suffer, and maybe arrest a few, and in 5-10 years maybe something better will come along.

[jeff47]

24. Did you seriously need me to add the sarcasm tag to this?

Yes, it's utterly impossible to write a different initiative that does not grant a monopoly for several years.

[Comrade Grumpy]

53. Well, Ohio activists haven't manged to actually get an initiative on theballot.

They've been trying for years. They could never get the money to get those signatures.

And now, who's going to put money into legalizing weed in Ohio?

I didn't especially like the oligopoly provisions of Issue 3, but it would have legalized weed.

I will also point out that several of the medical marijuana states have severe restrictions on who can grow commercially.

I think Ohio marijuana activists shot themselves in the foot by loudly opposing this.

[TeamPooka]

15. People are not going to change one bad policy for another. nt

[yardwork]

48. That would not go over well in Ohio.

Ohio was founded by farmers and small businessmen. The culture of free enterprise is still strong there.

[Agschmid]

11. Wow, surprising.

[liberal N proud]

13. It was one word that killed issue 3

Monopolies

[wysi]

14. Yep...

... a friend of mine in Columbus, who would normally be quite pro-legalization, was very active in opposing Issue 3 because of the state monopoly.

[mathematic]

17. I see social justice goes out the window because somebody might make a $

Legalizing pot isn't about your right to buy cheap weed. If you voted against this because of "monopolies" then you, truly, were putting profits over people.

No, I don't want to hear your excuses.

[Travis_0004]

20. The way I see it, we need about 20 million to put pot on next years ballot

Can I expect a donation from everybody who voted no?

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

40. Pft.

I don't have 'excuses'. I have reasons. Breaking the billionaires and returning America to economic equality is the only way to retake control of our government in an era when 'money = speech'. There's no justice, social or otherwise, in putting crony capitalism and drug cartels in the Ohio Constitution.

Anyone free to grow as much as they want is social justice. Not being limited to 4 plants, that you have to buy from the cartel, and then allowing the cops to search your home anytime they feel like to make sure you're not growing more or 'storing too much'.

As many have said, you want your 'social justice' or recreational weed, you put that, and that alone on the ballot, and we'll vote for it. Put marijuana in the seed catalogues, next to the vegetables and flowers.

[LuvLoogie]

51. Completely agree with you.

If it passed, you'd have the alcohol industry going after home brewers at some point.

[FrodosPet]

19. Michiganders! We need to step up and legalize ASAP

Let Ohio have Cedar Point and the college football victories, we cannot let them win legal weed before us as well!

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

49. I'm in! Let them keep Cedar Point! But wait ...

... "football victories"???11? I gotta find my bong so I can think about that one.
.
.
... nope, can't just give them football victories. They'll have to win them the hard way, as they often do.



goblu

[billhicks76]

22. GOOD...They Need To Be Put Down For Trying To Monopolize...Greedy Bastards!

In Oregon we do it right...ban monopolies. Who do these jerks think they are? Where were they when good, innocent growers were getting busted. There should be canopy limits of 1 acre or 10,000 sq ft indoors. They should grant licenses to those who can prove they grew when it was oppressed. These people make me sick. The carpetbaggers and interlopers deserve nothing as they sacrificed nothing and want to ride the backs of the oppressed. I will smile when they lose.

[Gregorian]

25. I actually had this conversation with someone in the grocers today.

People are truly heated about this. Another I know mentioned the huge facilities that are going into very remote properties, that are not locals doing community type gardening.

I think the unbridled greed isn't getting past people much longer.

[billhicks76]

26. I Live In Oregon

And am very familiar with this industry. Corporations and big $ are trying to take over but we have a tradition of protecting small businesses. We are Bernie supporters here not Bush loving Clinton sell outs.

[Gregorian]

55. It's a huge market. The greedy are bound to come running.

Like tobacco that's not bad for you. They're all over this. Billions of dollars.

[moondust]

28. How does a monopoly initiative

get on the ballot in the first place? WTF?

[NonMetro]

30. Was Monopoly Really The Reason For Most Who Voted Against It?

Most who voted against it were for legalization, but didn't like the business arrangement? Really?

They weren't just against legalization in this increasingly Red state with a Republican majority in the legislature and a Republican Governor?

[NobodyHere]

32. Well even in Colorado and Oregon it passed by about 55-45

Throw in the monopoly amendment and you can easily lose the support of liberals and libertarians.

[NonMetro]

52. I Can See That, But Oligopolies Already Control Most Commodities In This Country.

I mean, they can control oil, orange juice, and cable, but not MJ?

[Bradical79]

56. Yes, that's the reason I came across most often

I don't think it was the reasoning for "most" people, but was a big reason the swing vote went against it.

[colsohlibgal]

31. Monopoly Or Not

I voted for it, not thrilled by the monopolistic aspects but what now?

And really, how many opposed to the monopoly angle know any pot dealers it would impact?

One thing for sure our print and tv media here worked hard to defeat this. Misleading ads about candy marijuana treats for kids were so out of bounds and untrue.

[oldandhappy]

33. From the interviews I saw it seems the monopoly issue killed it.

[No Vested Interest]

38. You're correct. nt

[liberal_at_heart]

34. It looks like WA will continue to tax medical marijuana patients.

[Hoyt]

35. If not for the "monopolies," who would have put up the money to make this a viable issue?

If people actually voted against this because 10 companies would have had a "monopoly" in short-run, I think those voters likely hurt legalization legislation for quite awhile.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

41. How much money did you need?

You make it legal, businesses will sprout up to take advantage of. It worked just fine in Colorado without creating a cartel.

But really, just put it in the seed catalogues, with the vegetables and flowers. Let regular gardeners buy and grow. There doesn't need to be money sent to corporations every time the people get their rights expanded. We don't need to pay for the right to grow.

[Hoyt]

43. We are talking Ohio here. First you need the money to get it on the ballot. Second, you need the

money to convince people every person with some grow lights will not be producing and all the horror stories since Reefer Madness will not occur, there will be adequate regulation of "legal" growing vs. a black market, etc.

People who might be hesitant to vote for it if they thought it would end up like Starbucks, on every corner, might vote for it if they thought it would be low profile.

Whatever, it failed. See how quickly it comes back up.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

44. Every person with a grow light who wants to SHOULD be producing.

There should be 0 reason for cops to enter your home related to marijuana, nothing they can charge you with related to it that isn't already a crime on its own, such as crappy driving or causing accidents. If it's legal, then the reefer madness biddy on the block should be able to call up the police and say 'some thug on my street has hundreds of marijuana plants in his house!' and the cops should say 'So what? What do we care?'

[Hoyt]

45. I agree. Not sure they should be selling in shops though, sorry. Alas, it didn't pass.

You won't see it back anytime soon, and the failure may impact other state efforts.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

46. I think we might.

I think people just got greedy, went for the 'everything at once'.

I predict we'll see legal mj in Ohio inside 5 years, if only medical. Recreational might take 10, as the older folks more opposed to recreational use die off and stop voting, and newer voters come of age having seen it legal in other states.

[Hoyt]

47. Well, the vote was not even close. And I don't think it was because of "monopolies." n/t

[liberal_at_heart]

36. I would advise states to be careful of approving just any bill. WA did and we are paying for it.

They are destroying medical marijuana so they can have more profit from recreational marijuana.

[SoLeftIAmRight]

37. Here in Colorado the grows are toxic

heavy use of chemicals

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

42. So take some of those millions in taxes, and pay for some inspections.

Fine companies whose weed has too many chemicals or shut them down until they stop it.

[Elmer S. E. Dump]

50. Take God's gift to mankind and pour poison on it?

I'll grow my own, thank you very much. Well, I will when it becomes legal in Wisconsin, so no, I probably won't.

[silvershadow]

39. Good deal. It wasn't the right bill. Not to worry, I suspect it will come back again. nt