OHIOANS AGAINST UNSAFE DRUG LAWS RUN ADS AGAINST ISSUE 1

SCRIPT: Issue 1 will cost Ohio taxpayers $247 million, and Issue 1 will
allow serious drug offenders to avoid jail and conceal their criminal
record so they can get jobs like this (picture of doctor), this (picture of
pilot) and this (picture of school bus driver).

No wonder Mothers Against Drunk Driving and hundreds of other community
groups are voting no on Issue 1. Because we can't afford this ($247
million) and we can't afford this (child in school bus pulling away).

ON THE SCREEN:

The ad opens with a whopper of a number: 247, followed by six zeros. It
then segues to a shot of a police officer uncuffing a drug felon, freeing
the man to pursue a career in various high-risk occupations.

The two images emphasize what Issue 1 opponents say Ohioans can't afford to
give up: $247,000,000 and the safety of our children. The closing shot has
an elementary school-age boy looking out the back window of his bus as the
freed drug felon drives away.

ANALYSIS:

Dude! It's Otto! The anti-Issue 1 folks found an actor to play a more
sinister version of the burned-out school bus driver on "The Simpsons."
Unlike Otto, however, this guy may give your kids the willies.

No sooner does he shuck his handcuffs than he's donning surgical gloves,
wiggling his fingers and leering into the camera as he heads into the
operating room to, it appears, strangle the patient. Next he's an airline
pilot, risking the safety of his passengers at 31,000 feet.

But Ohioans Against Unsafe Drug Laws saved its best for last. An evil Otto
smirks as he prepares to close the school bus door on a group of youngsters
who have just tumbled into his bus. We are left with a shot of an angelic
little boy, staring out the rear window of the bus as his demonic bus
driver heads for . . . where?

ACCURACY:

While it is true that Issue 1 will cost $247 million - albeit over seven
years - the ad fails to acknowledge that the initiative also will save
taxpayers an undetermined amount of money because imprisoning drug users
costs far more than drug treatment.

Ohio's health care regulatory boards have raised concerns that Issue 1 will
prevent them from learning about practitioners who have drug problems
because it would allow defendants who successfully complete treatment to
have their court records sealed. Regulators also note that they generally
impose treatment regimens that are far more stringent than the maximum 18
months required under Issue 1.

But the ad employs scare tactics by implying that Issue 1 will endanger the
public by flooding safety-sensitive occupations with drug users.

The record-sealing provisions notwithstanding, hospitals, airlines and
school districts frequently do extensive pre-employment screening that
includes drug testing.

- - Ted Wendling