We all know what the chief flaw of Ohio's Issue 3 was: limiting commercial production of marijuana to 10 sites that are all backed by wealthy investors. Ideally, that provision would have not been in the measure at all. Very few people argued for this provision, but I decided to cast my vote in favor of Issue 3 regardless.
You chose to vote against it.
Here's what else you voted against specifically: legalizing possession and use of marijuana for anyone over the age of 21, legalizing medical marijuana for people with debilitating medical conditions, allowing home growing with a license, authorizing the presence of 1100 marijuana retailers, and taxes on revenue that would have gone to local government infrastructure. And those were just the explicit benefits noted in the bill.
What did you say to that?
"We need to wait for a better legalization bill. Vote 'no' on Issue 3."
But you also have forgotten that marijuana arrests are a racial justice issue. Despite marijuana use being pretty similar between white people and black people:
Marijuana arrests disproportionately hit black people:
Here's what happened to marijuana possession arrests in Massachusetts when you factor in decriminalization of possession of small amounts of marijuana in 2009:
The disparity still exists, so it's not like decriminalization made possession arrests more equitable, but nevertheless, the overall magnitude of effects is greatly reduced. That's enough to suggest that voting in favor of even an imperfect marijuana legalization bill furthers the cause of criminal justice.
What did you say to this?
"We need to wait for a better legalization bill. Vote 'no' on Issue 3."
There are people such as this individual who could have benefitted from Issue 3 immediately:
You're not even an Ohioan. I'm an Ohioan, and I have lupus. Do you know what that entails? The daily pain I live with is sickening. Do you know how lupus is treated? With life long low dose chemotherapy pills. That is literally poison, that my doctor wants to put into my body every single day for the rest of my life. Smoking weed alleviates about 80% of my symptoms and helps me to function. I can get up and go to work, play with my kids, and be (mostly) pain free. It sucks that every time I pick up some weed, or smoke that I have to be fearful of a fine and jail time. If I were ever caught with weed I'd lose my very well paying professional job, I wouldn't be able to pay my mortgage, and my children would suffer immensely, simply because I don't want poison in my body. I voted yes on issue 3 because despite popular belief, there are no plans for anything to be on the ballot next year. There is nothing else that's going to happen. We need to vote yes on 3 and amend the laws as time passes. Of course rich investors are going to get even richer. But does that mean I deserve to be treated like a criminal?
What did you say to this individual?
"We need to wait for a better legalization bill. Vote 'no' on Issue 3."
I voted for Issue 3 because I recognized that while I have the privilege of waiting for justice, other people did not.
I voted for Issue 3 because relative to the status quo, it constituted significant progress. There is no logical argument that it represented a step backward from the status quo, hence why a pro-legalization vote against it is incoherent.
As a commenter in another diary pointed out, Issue 3 was essentially the Obamacare of marijuana legalization initiatives; oh sure, it would make select groups of people richer than average (the investors backing the 10 commercial production sites compared with private insurance company executives), but there were still provisions within both measures that comprehensively made them undeniable steps forward. The expansion of Medicaid was definitely a form of economic justice, but because Obamacare didn't include a public option, some progressives were ready to throw the whole thing out.
If you've ever wondered why some people in the Democratic umbrella don't trust progressives—white progressives specifically—look to the pro-legalization progressives who voted against Issue 3 as the reason. You pride yourself on standing up for the vulnerable in our society, but when presented with an opportunity at the ballot to stand up for the vulnerable, what is your war cry?
"We need to wait for a better legalization bill. Vote 'no' on Issue 3."
This was another case of progressives being activist-smart but electorally-stupid.
All this ranting is separate from the fact that I agree the bill would have had much better chance of passing if it didn't restrict commercial production to 10 sites backed by wealthy investors. It allowed opponents to sell the initiative as not benefiting average Ohioan, and then they just threw all the fear mongering over the drug on top of that. But jesus, just how blinded by privilege do you have to be not to recognize that a marijuana oligopoly with medical marijuana, home growing, and immediate benefits to our criminal justice system is still a lot fucking better than the status quo?
