highly doubt it now with that trick. That is more f---ing bullshit from Kasuck, Hustead and the rest of the Republicons.

Voting yes on both makes marijuana legal in Ohio, but kills the monopoly part of three. If both pass, there will be work to be done to figure out how it gets sold and who all gets to grow it, but it will be legal. Voting 'no' on 2 and 'yes' on 3 makes it legal, but gives a bunch of mostly rich out of staters the monopoly on growing it in Ohio.

(ETA - now doing more searches, I see that that is listed as only 'one possibility' in most articles, that it gets tied up in the courts for a while, and that they might not actually go that route. Wherever I read about it before, they seemed to think it was a slam dunk that it would only void the monopoly part.)

the understanding I got it would void Issue 3. The understanding I got from the video was if you wanted marijuana legalized you had to vote yes on 3 and no on 2. They said if you didn't want marijuana to vote no on both. I hope you are right.

It looks like it goes to court, and that's one possible way it winds up, but not the only possible way, grrr.

right wing dominated court in Ohio will stop the marijuana legalization.

If 3 has enough votes to pass, pro-mj folks in Ohio just wait 4 years til the next Presidential year ballot (to get as many young voters as possible) and throw another version of it back on without the monopoly language, and they're almost guaranteed a success that time around. We'll get there, just maybe not as soon.

Issue 2 takes effect immediatly
Issue 3 takes effect in 30 days

If 2 conflicting ballot issues take effect the same day, the one with more votes will proceed, but in this case, Issue 2 is enacted 2 days sooner. I'm sure there would be a legal challange, but IMO issue 2 will be enacted, and issue 3 will be void, if both pass (even if 3 has more votes)

For answers.

If it will make a small number of well connected people a lot of money?

some Republican with connections to Kasuck.

You voted against monopolies (technically oligarchies), so if issue 2 passes, it will prevent a monopoly.

that one can/should be informed before voting.

I will vote against issue 3 based on the 10 parties pre-chosen (by whom?) to be authorized growers.
If issues 3 wins and is successful against legal challenges based on a win by issue 2, issue 3 will become part of the State charter, which is for all practical purposes virtually impossible to revise or eliminate.

Among the growers selected is Dudley Taft, of Ohio's famous Taft family, and Oscar Robinson, celebrated basketball player. Needless to say, all ten grower groups are composed of moneyed elites.

Issue 3 has mucho money behind it and is running ads non-stop, just as a pile of money was spent to get enough signatures to put issue 3 on the ballot. Anti-issue 3 ads are non-existent, as far as I can see.

They invested in the money go get signatures to get it on the ballot, and spend money to pass it.

Thats how the 10 were chosen.

If issue 3 fails, I could propose a law giving myself a monopoly on growing weed, provided I can get the signatures to get it on the ballot.

They got together with Powers that Be, and, after having their slots in the Ten, put up the money -
which was/is easily accessible to them - to get the signatures and to advertise.

And, yet, DUers constantly complain about some candidates being too connected with the money/power structure.
One can't have it both ways.

If 2 passes, then Time Warner can't be a monopoly on our Cable TV service and I might be able to get someone different for better price for a while.

I went yes on 2, no on 3--I'm waiting for legalization that doesn't put another monopoly in the state constitution (like the casino vote did and Issue 3 is trying to do)