Rustlestiltskin Posted October 5, 2015 Report Share Posted October 5, 2015 If this bill doesn't get past it is going to be many, many years before it makes it on the ballot again. The only reason it made it this time is b/c of all the money behind it. And who cares about making rich richer that happens everyday at least this time the rest of us would get something out of it. And laws can be changed so it is a foot in the door if it sucks then fix it but you have to start somewhere. http://i.imgur.com/A6yNhUQ.gif Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpaceGhost Posted October 5, 2015 Report Share Posted October 5, 2015 Weed is important. Look at these football players that throw away money to smoke.... SMH. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LJ Posted October 5, 2015 Report Share Posted October 5, 2015 Issue 3 supporters be like http://i.imgur.com/ZF1QUKA.jpg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RC K9 Posted October 5, 2015 Report Share Posted October 5, 2015 I wish I could give you some positive rep for this. Ditto. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ImUrOBGYN Posted October 6, 2015 Report Share Posted October 6, 2015 I wish I could give you some positive rep for this. Ditto. I just realized day before yesterday that shit was gone and no longer an option. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ImUrOBGYN Posted October 6, 2015 Report Share Posted October 6, 2015 Ditto. I dittoed your ditto. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitey Posted October 30, 2015 Report Share Posted October 30, 2015 The significant problem with Issue2 is the stifling of one's right to petition for tax reform. Vote No on Issue 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
o0n8 Posted October 30, 2015 Report Share Posted October 30, 2015 The significant problem with Issue2 is the stifling of one's right to petition for tax reform. Vote No on Issue 2 *to establish a preferential tax status Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitey Posted October 30, 2015 Report Share Posted October 30, 2015 And I prefer lower taxes Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HotCarl Posted October 31, 2015 Report Share Posted October 31, 2015 The significant problem with Issue2 is the stifling of one's right to petition for tax reform. Vote No on Issue 2 I'll admit I didn't really understand your post until I read this... http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/local/2015/10/30/conservative-lawyer-sees-ill-effects-from-anti-monopoly-issue-2.html Which makes sense... kinda. What i dont understand is, if issue 2 will change the process in which the state recognizes monopolies then whats wrong with the current process in which the state recognizes monopolies? Also fuck issue 3, say no to that shit all day. Colorado has been the poster boy on how to effectively create a legalized cannibis industry in a state and last fiscal year collected $72 millinon in tax revenue from cannabis alone (compared with only $42 million from alcohol taxes). Personally I dont smoke and dont mind anyone who does, it is an eventuality in this generation that it will be legalized but it should be done right and with the publics best interest in mind, not 10 private companies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HotCarl Posted October 31, 2015 Report Share Posted October 31, 2015 http://i.imgur.com/A6yNhUQ.gif This is by far the funniest thing I have seen in weeks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turbs3000 Posted October 31, 2015 Report Share Posted October 31, 2015 I'll admit I didn't really understand your post until I read this... http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/local/2015/10/30/conservative-lawyer-sees-ill-effects-from-anti-monopoly-issue-2.html Which makes sense... kinda. What i dont understand is, if issue 2 will change the process in which the state recognizes monopolies then whats wrong with the current process in which the state recognizes monopolies? Also fuck issue 3, say no to that shit all day. Colorado has been the poster boy on how to effectively create a legalized cannibis industry in a state and last fiscal year collected $72 millinon in tax revenue from cannabis alone (compared with only $42 million from alcohol taxes). Personally I dont smoke and dont mind anyone who does, it is an eventuality in this generation that it will be legalized but it should be done right and with the publics best interest in mind, not 10 private companies. So after reading that article I'm still not seeing a reason to vote against issue 2. The 2 vote solution seems completely practical and doesn't limit our rights in any way. Can someone clarify what they feel is the downside? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Karacho1647545492 Posted October 31, 2015 Report Share Posted October 31, 2015 So after reading that article I'm still not seeing a reason to vote against issue 2. The 2 vote solution seems completely practical and doesn't limit our rights in any way. Can someone clarify what they feel is the downside? The only downside to issue 2 is it legally supercedes issue 3, so it's a death sentence for the investors' oligopoly. Aka there is no downside. No on 2 no matter what. It's one of those laws that in 50 years when all this is forgotten, people will say "That's just common fucking sense, why do we need a law to spell that out?" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turbs3000 Posted October 31, 2015 Report Share Posted October 31, 2015 The only downside to issue 2 is it legally supercedes issue 3, so it's a death sentence for the investors' oligopoly. Aka there is no downside. No on 2 no matter what. It's one of those laws that in 50 years when all this is forgotten, people will say "That's just common fucking sense, why do we need a law to spell that out?" Did you mean to say no on 2? Also unfortunately it doesn't supercede 3 unless it has more votes this time around I believe? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitey Posted October 31, 2015 Report Share Posted October 31, 2015 http://www.ohioconstitution.org/?s=Issue+2 If the link works above, then it has a breakdown of Issue 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattKatz Posted October 31, 2015 Report Share Posted October 31, 2015 Yeah, personally I am very confused on all this mess. I think laws and wording to ALL Laws should have to be written in a way that normal people, with nothing more than a HS education can understand them and be able to make a vote where they understand what they are voting for. In reality, the way laws are written or proposed, IMO, is morally wrong and done so that it only benefits those that can read through the BS if they read it at all. I think reform to make things simpler is really what we need in this country. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turbs3000 Posted October 31, 2015 Report Share Posted October 31, 2015 http://www.ohioconstitution.org/?s=Issue+2 If the link works above, then it has a breakdown of Issue 2 That article and site are incredibly bias. It is also littered with inaccuracies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitey Posted November 1, 2015 Report Share Posted November 1, 2015 Explain please Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rustlestiltskin Posted November 3, 2015 Report Share Posted November 3, 2015 Wake up ya potheads. Don't forget to put on your favorite Hemp jewelry and go watch your vote burn in flames today. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cordell Posted November 3, 2015 Report Share Posted November 3, 2015 NO ON 2!!! Nobody really cares if you get high, most companies already have a no drug policy, so if you think there are a ton of people who don't already use it will start you're nuts. Once the fad wears off the difference will be negligible just not as taboo as it is now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nickey4271647545519 Posted November 3, 2015 Report Share Posted November 3, 2015 NO ON 2!!! Nobody really cares if you get high, most companies already have a no drug policy, so if you think there are a ton of people who don't already use it will start you're nuts. Once the fad wears off the difference will be negligible just not as taboo as it is now. Why should i vote no on 2? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HotCarl Posted November 3, 2015 Report Share Posted November 3, 2015 So after reading that article I'm still not seeing a reason to vote against issue 2. The 2 vote solution seems completely practical and doesn't limit our rights in any way. Can someone clarify what they feel is the downside? The downside that I kept seeing was that it puts more power into the hands of the ballot board on deciding what issues get to be voted on when it comes to the question of a monopoly/ oligopoly. http://ballotpedia.org/Ohio_Initiated_Monopolies_Amendment,_Issue_2_(2015) http://www.ballotpedia.org is an excellent, non-partisan resource for voters. It explains every issue being voted on, the arguments for and against and the supporters to both sides and why. Should both issue 2 and 3 pass, the Ohio AG says issue 2 will supersede issue 3. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iwashmycar Posted November 3, 2015 Report Share Posted November 3, 2015 EDIT: ^^^^ya beat me. This is the text for 2: The proposed amendment would: • Prohibit any petitioner from using the Ohio Constitution to grant a monopoly, oligopoly, or cartel for their exclusive financial benefit or to establish a preferential tax status. • Prohibit any petitioner from using the Ohio Constitution to grant a commercial interest, right, or license that is not available to similarly situated persons or nonpublic entities. • Require the bipartisan Ohio Ballot Board to determine if a proposed constitutional amendment violates the prohibitions above, and if it does, present two separate ballot questions to voters. Both ballot questions must receive a majority yes vote before the proposed amendment could take effect. • Prohibit from taking effect any proposed constitutional amendment appearing on the November 3, 2015 General Election ballot that creates a monopoly, oligopoly, or cartel for the sale, distribution, or other use of any federal Schedule I controlled substance. • The Ohio Supreme Court has original, exclusive jurisdiction in any action related to the proposal. If passed, the amendment will become effective immediately. It sounds like current proposed amendments do not need the Ohio Ballot Board to step in and "say" if the proposed amendment "creates a monopoly, ect" but if 2 passes this board will forever review new amendments.... That seems like it could hurt a lot of future issues at a chance to get to the peoples vote......the Ballot Board would have this new power to stop it in its tracks..... At least that is how I am hearing it. No on 2 sounds like a smart move, not even looking at it with regard to Issue 3. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RC K9 Posted November 3, 2015 Report Share Posted November 3, 2015 Everyone be sure to get out there and vote NO on issue 3 and NO on issue 2 as well since Issue 2 has language that will basically make it impossible for citizens to ever create a constitutional amendment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turbs3000 Posted November 3, 2015 Report Share Posted November 3, 2015 The downside that I kept seeing was that it puts more power into the hands of the ballot board on deciding what issues get to be voted on when it comes to the question of a monopoly/ oligopoly. Which I guess personally doesn't seem like a down side. It's not like they get to toss out or stop whats being voted on or change it in any way other then to take it from 1 question to 2 questions. In the example of making weed legal the current option says: vote yes to allow marijuana to become legal in ohio, and that these 10 companies will be the only ones allowed to grow for distribution and distribute it. The 2 question option would be: 1. should marijuana be legal in ohio y/n 2. should these 10 companies be allowed to be the only ones profiting from it. y/n Now obviously this is a hastily done and simplistic example but that appears to be the gist of it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.