Cannabis policy confusion reigns in Ohio, a traditional swing state with a diverse population which is often considered a bellwether for the politics of the nation as a whole. But while the people of Ohio stand overwhelmingly in support of major reforms to the Buckeye State’s outdated cannabis policies, the myriad proposals of competing reform groups — of which one in particular has resorted to apparently deceptive tactics — have led to a confusing political landscape for reform-minded voters.

The extent of the confusion has reached, apparently, even the state’s highest halls of power. Governor John Kasich (R) has said more than once that he will not consider supporting the decriminalization or legalization of cannabis until doctors tell him that it’s a good idea. And sure enough, the American Association of Pediatricians called for the federal rescheduling of cannabis just last week, almost as if in response to the governor’s request. Even so, the open letter from the country’s largest association of pediatricians did not advocate for the full legalization of cannabis for all purposes, so its effect on Kasich’s thinking remains unclear.

If the governor remains intransigent much longer, the issue will likely be decided without him. At last count there are at least three prominent reform groups targeting the 2016 ballot, and all have major momentum behind them. But some of the groups offer very different proposals under similar names.

Time to clear the smoke. In order that Ohioans can finally get the reform they need and deserve, here are the top reform proposals aiming for the 2016 Ohio ballot.

Responsible Ohioans for Cannabis — “Legal as Lettuce”

The most permissive proposal comes courtesy of Responsible Ohioans for Cannabis (ROC), a well-established grassroots campaign with a policy approach to cannabis perhaps best summed up by its website’s URL — LegalAsLettuce.com.

Key points of their objective include:

Any adult would be able to grow up to 99 cannabis plants, provided they have permission of the property owner where the cannabis would be grown.

No producer would need a license to produce or sell cannabis until they have sold $5,800 worth or more in a given tax year, and even then, the license fees would not be automatic and would be capped at $1,250 per year in combined total for each cultivation or retail site. Additionally, commercial growers would have no limit on the number of plants they would be allowed to grow.

Although sales taxes on cannabis would be allowed, they would not exceed the general state sales tax rate which applies to any other good or commodity.

Don McAdams, spokesperson for Responsible Ohioans for Cannabis, says that he understands that some think his organization’s approach may be too liberal. But he responds that ROC’s initiative only reflects the values that its supporters have demanded. “We are the only group offering protections for property, parental, and gun rights, as well as limitations on licenses and taxes,” says McAdams. “That’s real cannabis freedom.”

ResponsibleOhio — The “Cartel” Comes Clean

Although ResponsibleOhio (RO) sports a name suspiciously similar to that of Responsible Ohioans for Cannabis, that is where nearly all similarity ends between the two reform groups. As opposed to the more established ROC, the much-newer RO has employed public relations tactics secretive enough to draw comparisons between their group and illegal drug cartels operating in the shadows. “Why this group chose an almost identical name,” says McAdams, “is something we can only speculate about.” (Responsible Ohio representatives declined all interview requests for this article.)

As opposed to their formerly secretive tactics, however, RO appears to be embarking on a new era of transparency — at least, up to a point. After initially declining to release the text of their proposal, the group has now revealed a synopsis of the plan which at least outlines its major features: legalization of a highly-centralized, highly regulated distribution network including a maximum 10 cultivation centers and 5 testing centers. Top state officials have already spoken out against this aspect of the plan, characterizing such restricted production as a de facto “government monopoly” in cannabis.

It is also widely expected that if RO’s plan prevails, its small group of wealthy backers will receive preferential treatment to gobble up the extremely limited number of licenses which would be available. The ResponsibleOhio campaign does not vehemently deny this expectation, but has at least had the courtesy to finally inform the public as to who those wealthy backers are. For the full list of the top financial backers, who run the gamut from straight-laced real estate investors to former pro athletes Frostee Rucker and Oscar Robertson, click here.

Ohio Families CANN — Thinking of the Children

Theresa Daniello, Director of Ohio Families CANN (OFCANN), says her organization is taking a more conservative approach to end cannabis prohibition than most groups in Ohio.

OFCANN, which is comprised of 45 Ohio families with catastrophically ill children, aim to end their daily health nightmares with a new bill that would provide cannabis and endocannabinoid education for medical professionals as well as legislators.

Ohio Families CANN’s bill is designed to establish a pilot program with the following objectives:

Provide catastrophically ill children in Ohio their whole plant cannabis immediately to provide them relief

Assemble a stakeholder study group comprised of medical professionals, legislators, and caregivers to observe the cannabis production and administration to patients – from seed to laboratory for testing to distribution to patients.

Provide education programs specifically for doctors and legislators about whole plant cannabis medicine, the endocannabinoid system, and national policy.

Daniello says that her organization is not profit driven; in fact, implementation of their proposed pilot program could lead to saving Ohioans money down the road. For example, Daniello cites the case of one Ohio family with a catastrophically ill child forced to spend $2,000,000 dollars within a 22-month period just to keep their child alive. Some similarly situated families depend on state funded Medicaid. Ohio Families CANN’s program could relieve these Medicaid costs because it would be self-sustaining.

Furthermore, Daniello says that taking a conservative approach to this issue and providing for research is the smart approach. “Had we done our research on tobacco, it probably wouldn’t be legal today,” says Daniello. “We have seen CBD-only treatment fail which is why we only support whole plant medicine.”

All of the organizations in Ohio that are working toward ending the prohibition of cannabis have reached out to Ohio Families CANN and expressed their support… except ResponsibleOhio.