Voters confused by abortion, marijuana issues | Dave Yost

Dave Yost is Ohio's attorney general.

A fellow who runs a construction business asked me recently what would happen if Ohio Issue 2 passes this fall, making it legal to use marijuana recreationally. He's worried about people coming to work stoned and hurting, or even killing, other people.

Another Ohioan told me that she isn’t too worried about Issue 1, the proposed reproductive rights constitutional amendment, because "we will still have the heartbeat bill."

Still another thought Issue 1 would amend the U.S. Constitution.

More: The truth about marijuana. Ohio business groups are spreading myths about Issue 2.

As with the bail bond issue from last November, there is misunderstanding, misinformation and just plain misses all over the place. That's why I recently published a legal analysis of each issue, which you can find on the Ohio Attorney General’s website.

They aren’t policy analyses. That's the "why" question – and that's up to Ohio voters. They don't tell you how to vote.

Instead, the analyses answer the “what” question, describing how these two issues, if approved, would change the legal environment.

Ohioans are not up to speed on abortion or marijuana issues.

I talk to a lot of people.

People of different faiths and different politics — assuming those two things are still distinct.

People from different walks of life – some have calluses on their hands, and some have calluses on their butts. Some are smart, and some less so. But this is their most commonly shared trait other than being human: They're not yet up to speed on these issues.

This is key because there is no more important duty for a citizen than voting on a law or constitutional amendment at the ballot box. All political power is inherent in the people, the Ohio Constitution says – and a vote on constitutional amendment is the most important use of that power, more important than choosing a legislature or a governor, more important than turning out bums at city hall.

Politicians come and go.

Laws – and especially the constitution – tend to stay around. Since Ohioans gained the power to directly amend the state constitution in 1912, no voter-passed constitutional amendment has ever been repealed.

The Ohio Constitution also calls me the chief law officer of the state. When we're talking about the legal effects of proposed new laws, it’s directly in the wheelhouse of the attorney general’s office.

I assembled an internal team of lawyers and other professionals to do these analyses and vet each other's work, and mine. Our goal was to call balls and strikes – what's in and what's out – and to admit when we can’t tell.

Some people are going to be skeptical about inherent bias, but lawyers train to be able to argue both sides of a case. If you can't see the other guy's case, and understand it, you're going to lose a lot of cases. I've told lawyers who’ve worked with me for the past 25 years that if you fall in love with your theory of the case, get ready to have your heart broken.

I'm aware that a relatively small number of people will read these documents. We tried hard to make them accessible to non-lawyers, but it’s complicated stuff.

But the people who will read them are opinion leaders, the kind of folks the rest of us ask during halftime of a football game on the weekend before the election, “Hey, what do you think about those issues?"

Maybe a few arguments will be settled between the warring camps.

When I was a young newspaper reporter, I worked for a Scripps paper. The founder, E.W. Scripps, was famous for saying this: "Give light, and the people will find their own way."

In my experience, they really do.

Dave Yost is Ohio's attorney general.

This article originally appeared on The Columbus Dispatch: How will legal abortion, weed change Ohio? Yost on office's analysis