LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS FORUM: NO/FORCHIONE/YES/DIAZ CONTEND ON OHIO ISSUE 1

SHALL OHIO "LOOSEN UP" ON NON-VIOLENT DRUG OFFENDERS?

(A STARK COUNTY POLITICAL REPORT CHARACTERIZATION)

ALL THE RESOURCES NEEDED TO DETERMINE 
HOW TO VOTE
ON ISSUE 1

It was clearly worthwhile for Stark Countians to attend the face-off at the Canton League of Women Voters (LWV) Plain Township Branch of the Stark County District Library on Tuesday evening on the merits/demerits of Issue 1 as an amendment to the Ohio Constitution via an Ohio statutory law provision authorizing "Initiative Petitions."

Former Repository reporter and most recently WKSU reporter M.L Schultze (recently retired) did a superlative job of drawing out Alliance for Safety and Justice official Shakyra Diaz (for passage) and Stark County Court of Common Pleas judge Frank Forchione (against passage) on their arguments for/against the issue on the basis of questions generated by the 50 or so Stark County citizens who attended Tuesday's forum.

One of the weaknesses of prior LWV civic presentations has been, in the opinion of the SCPR, the lack of a highly skilled moderator such as M.L. Schultze.



Hopefully, the LWV will prevail on Schultze to continue serving the organization in future League civic events.

The SCPR does salute Canton LWV for organizing and putting on the Issue 1 Forum.

For quite a while after news broke that the initiative qualified (August 22, 20180 for the November 6th ballot, many if not most Ohioans did not know what to make of Issue 1.

Slowly but surely leading government and political figures have weighed in on whether or not the measure should pass.

So called "expert" input should be reviewed by every voter.

There are a number of terrific sources for voters to resource in coming to a determination, to wit:

• Ballotpedia
• The SCPR recommends the Ballotpedia treatment as the most objective and thorough source for citizens independently and sincerely making his/her decision based on a perception of which side makes the better argument
• Ohio Policy Matters,
• Ohio Supreme Court Justice Maureen O'Connor
• Ohio Prosecuting Attorney Association

However, in the final analysis it is up to you and me (this blogger is still undecided on the issue) to inform ourselves and whichever way we vote, the vote should be an "informed" vote.

The Stark County Political Report (SCPR, The Report) thinks readers owe it to themselves to read the proposed Constitutional amendment, to wit:

The "additional cost" to taxpayers for implementing Issue 1?

Nothing!  Really?

According to supporters of the measure, there is simply a reallocation across Ohio of the monies saved from not having Felony 4 and Felony 5 first and second time drug offenders in prison to approved treatment programs across the state.

Of course, voters have to evaluate whether or not such financing will be adequate to make the treatment programs "effective" over and above the monies for treatment/incarceration currently being spent by Ohio.

After having reviewed "so-called" 'expert' opinion and having read the proposed amendment, listen to/watch Canton League of Women Voters' Issue 1 Forum representatives Judge Frank Forchione and Shakyra Diaz (see SCPR video immediately below), watch/listen to folks just like you and me who attended Tuesday forum.

First, the open of the forum by Canton LWV president Amy Shriver Dreussi.



Next up, Diaz and Forchione highlights.

Their opening arguments:



The question of how legislation implemented in other states have worked out:



The question of whether the fact that Issue 1 is a Constitutional Amendment proposal rather than a result of a legislative deliberative process is a difference maker.

A SCPR Note:  Judge Forchione throughout the evening (in the assessment of the SCPR) made "a big deal that the promoters of Issue 1 (according to him) include Facebook owner Mark Zuckerberg with an accompanying reflection on outside states with an emphasis on California want to dictate how Ohio deals with its illegal drug problem.

Moreover, Forchione cites that Stark County in 2018 compared to 2017 experienced a 40% drop in death rates.  However, in another segment of the forum he talks about Ohio overall has experienced a 46% increase at some 3,000 deaths)

Issue 1 is for "all" of Ohio, not just Stark County.

One final concern:  Judge Forchione throughout the presentation equates Issue 1 with being a measure mandating treating Felony 4 & 5 drug offense as the equivalency to issuing a traffic ticket.

Really?  Unless the SCPR has missed something in this blog, 41 years as an attorney; Ohio law does not turn a third traffic offense into a felony for which an offender likely will go to prison.

The video of the Diaz/Forchione exchange on the legislation/Constitutional Amendment approach.  Which would be better?



Aren't Drug Courts enough to deal with Opioid problem? 



In this video segment, Diaz makes a powerful argument about $1.8 billion for being spent on Ohio's prisons, one half of which are people with non-violent drug convictions (implying without effective results on how Ohio copes with the Opioid crisis) compared  which she says is about eight (8) times what Ohio puts into education:



The question of non-violents getting up-to-25% reduction in sentence.

(Note:  It was distressing to the SCPR that Judge Forchione (who as a judge is obligated by virtue of the office he holds to be fair in dialogue) failed to credit Diaz and other Ohioans as being part of the Issue 1 formation.  As noted above, it seems that Forchione is being somewhat demagogic in focusing on Facebook's Zuckerberg and California as meddlers in Ohio's drug policy)

Later on in the discussion Forchione suggests that Issue 1 creates a conflict with other Ohio legislation (e.g. TCAP Link) re: Ohio's ten largest counties which includes Stark County.)



According to Shakyra Diaz, Ohio is #2 in the nation for Opioid overdoses, treatment "outside" the prison system is Ohio's best opportunity to deal with the Opioid problem.



Stark Countian Dixie Wadsworth is a responsible citizen way challenged Diaz "non-answer" to Wadworth's question re:  If Issue 1 passes, where, in an institutional context funded by Ohio tax dollars, will beneficiaries of Issue 1's formula "actually" get treatment?

Moreover, Forchione weighs-in on the question of the specifics (program and money) lacking in the Amendment proposal.


The video of this segment of the Canton LWV discussion forum:



If the Amendment proposal passes and does not work, how does it get fixed?



The Forchione/Diaz "closing" arguments:



Finally, see/hear three SCPR video interviews of citizen-attendees of the LWV event.

Citizen Interview #1:



Citizen Interview #2



Citizen Interview #3



On Thursday night, The Stark County Political Report was in Alliance for a candidates forum sponsored by Mount Union's Regula Center for Applied Politics.

The question of Issue 1 came up for Democratic gubernatorial candidate Richard Cordray's representative Joe Schiavoni [a Mahoning County based state senator who ran against Cordray in the May, 2018 governor's primary election].

Readers should thorough enjoy this video segment wherein Schiavoni speaking for Cordray tells the audience he is a "no" on Issue 1 whereas Cordray is a "yes."

Watch this "political 'high wire'" act.



NOTE:  Republican gubernatorial candidate Mike DeWine did not have a representative at the Alliance event.  

Here is a Cleveland.com (The Cleveland Plain Dealer) editorial video featuring Cordray and DeWine and the positions on Issue 1.




Having followed the steps recommended by the SCPR you are now an informed voter and qualified to vote either way on the issue based on your personal evaluation of the pro/con arguments.

Thanks for being a "responsible" citizen!