Marijuana legalization appears to be edging closer in Ohio
By: Mason Mckenrick
Tags: 2016 Election, Issues, Social Issues, Marijuana, Ohio

Marijuana legalization appears to be edging closer in Ohio

By Jack Dolan and Mason McKenrick

On a clear October night, about 20 minutes southwest of Cleveland, a meeting takes place at the Cuyahoga County Public Library in Parma, Ohio. In the small, musty, jam-packed room, reporters vigorously scribble in their legal pads while doctors, lawyers and the general public eagerly await their turn to ask questions. The constant foot-tapping, pen-biting and visible sweat from the foreheads of audience members makes their anxiety for answers unmistakably clear. The topic is marijuana and the tone is serious.

One month ago, Ohio Gov. John Kasich signed Ohio Bill 523, legalizing medical marijuana statewide. On Oct. 13, the League of Women Voters in partnership with Case Western Reserve and cleveland.com curated a panel for the general public to ask questions about the legalization of marijuana in Ohio. Panelists included Dr. Brian Bachelder, president of Ohio State Medical Association and family physician at Akron General Hospital; Garret Fortune, CEO of FunkSac — Compliant Packaging for the Cannabis Industry; and Thomas G. Haren, of the law firm Seeley, Savidge, Erbert & Gourash, LPA, and editor of the Ohio Marijuana Law blog. Ohioans ranging in age from 20 to 60 filled the small conference room at the library where the meeting was held.

The legalization of marijuana for any purpose has been an issue increasingly pressed by U.S. citizens nationwide. Half of the states have legalized marijuana in some form, according to Russell Berman of The Atlantic, while the other half have seen intensified pressure from their populations to challenge the current legal status of the drug. Out of the 25 states that have legalized marijuana, only four have legalized the drug for recreational use. The other 21 states have legalized marijuana for medicinal use only.

The emerging issue when discussing marijuana legalization in any form stems from its classification as a Schedule I drug by the federal Drug Enforcement Agency. A Schedule I drug is described as a substance with extremely high potential for abuse, with absolutely no currently accepted medical use. Advocates for legalizing marijuana — whether for purposes medicinal or recreational — argue this is a harsh scheduling for what seems to be a rather harmless drug in comparison to other Schedule I substances like heroin, LSD and ecstasy. And besides, there is a currently accepted medical use that half our state governments accept as valid.

Furthermore, marijuana enthusiasts question the legal status of infamously harmful substances like tobacco and alcohol, which are legal and not scheduled by the DEA whatsoever, even though they contribute to more than 500,000 deaths in the U.S. annually, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control.

As of 2016, there have been no recorded deaths in direct correlation with marijuana use, according to Kim Bellmare of the Huffington Post. From an incarceration standpoint, marijuana-related arrests in the U.S. surpassed 700,000, with 88 percent of them for possession only, according to the American Civil Liberties Union.

The reasons stated above, and numerous other reasons, are motive enough for U.S. citizens to call for reform. However, opponents of legalization have continued to struggle to dissuade on-the-fence citizens from allowing the drug to be used in any form.

Haren, a John Carroll University and Cleveland-Marshall College of Law graduate, specializes in defending citizens accused of drug-related crimes. When asked why Bill 523 was passed in 2016, even though it was rejected just one year prior, Haren responded simply, “I think that’s clear: They passed it so swiftly to avoid a ballot initiative.”

Haren continued, “Legislatures immediately started to look into another solution, as they knew there would be another ballot initiative coming. They wanted to avoid being locked into a program in the Constitution.” Meaning, the state of Ohio did not want marijuana to be on a ballot initiative, thus intertwining the drug into the state’s Constitution. This allows for more flexibility from a legislative standpoint on marijuana.

A heavy concern during the panel was about legal protection regarding the medical use of marijuana, now that it is permitted in Ohio. As of right now, there are no physicians who are allowed to prescribe marijuana medicinally in the state of Ohio. Bachelder, the physician on the panel, touched on this concern. He explained to the audience that it can take up to two years for a physician to earn a license to prescribe medical marijuana, “if anyone is brave enough to do so.”

That raised some eyebrows. “Even though cannabis is legal for medicinal purposes, physicians will likely be careful when applying for licenses and actually prescribing the drug as medicine,” he stated. Bachelder informed the audience of the looming risks physicians with medical marijuana licenses will face when it comes to prescribing. In this new territory, Ohio doctors will surely tread lightly.

As for recreational use, Haren, along with the other panelists, agreed it will be the next topic of concern for Ohioans. This pattern has been witnessed in the 24 other states where marijuana has been legalized already. Once the drug is legal for medicinal use, the next big push for recreational legalization quickly follows.

“If you legalize recreational marijuana the right way, I don’t have a problem with it,” Haren declared. “In other legal states we haven’t seen the ‘bogeyman’ that prohibitionists have been talking about.”

He further justified his point when comparing casino prohibitionists to marijuana prohibitionists: “It’s similar to what we saw with casinos here in Ohio. Everybody said ‘Oh crime rates are going to go through the roof. We’ll have the mob come in. People are going to gamble their life savings.’ And none of it has happened.”

Haren backed up his point even further by explaining how teen use of marijuana has decreased in states like Colorado and Oregon since the legalization for recreational use was implemented. According to a study done by the Colorado Department of Public Health, teen use of marijuana dropped nearly one percent and has dipped below the national average since recreational use was legalized.

The booming economic possibilities legalization of recreational marijuana can potentially bring to Ohio were the basis of the next argument, with Haren giving a ballpark estimate in the $300 million range in anticipated annual revenues. As it has in other states, marijuana can bring millions of dollars in tax revenue that goes directly into the state’s coffers.

On top of that, Haren seemed overtly agitated when describing incarceration for marijuana possession — a huge problem in the U.S. right now, as laws about the drug are rapidly changing. It’s an area he has studied and is exceptionally knowledgeable about. When stressing the benefits of legalizing marijuana for recreational use, Haren proclaimed, “It fixes a lot of the inequities of our justice system. For instance, people of color are being charged, arrested and convicted in disproportionate rates to, you know, white kids, for the same types of offenses, despite the same rates of use.

“From a criminal justice standpoint, it (legalization) makes a lot of sense.”

With elections looming, Ohioans need to know exactly where their government stands on legalization. Several attempts were made to contact Democratic Rep. Marcia L. Fudge of Congressional District 11 — where John Carroll University is located — by email and telephone, yet there was no response. The same happened with her Republican opponent, Beverly Goldstein. Neither has openly stated her opinion about Bill 523 or legalizing recreational use of marijuana.

The post-panel attitude seemed a bit more light-hearted than its beginning. Bachelder made the final statement: “Don’t toke and drive!” This brought forth a roaring laugh amongst the 60 or so audience members in attendance. The crowd stayed for a while afterwards, introducing themselves to the panelists, who stayed to clarify things attendees needed further information about. The exiting mood of the room was noticeably optimistic; attendees seemed happy to have gone.