>>> SUMMER SALES FOR LEGAL MARIJUANA.

WELCOME TO "COLUMBUS ON THE RECORD."

FOUR MONTHS AFTER OHIO VOTERS LEGALIZED RECREATIONAL MARIJUANA, OHIO APPEARS READY TO OPEN SALES TO EVERY ADULT.

THE PERMITTING AND RULE-MAKING PROCESS IS MOVING ALONG..

THE STATE MUST RELEASE APPLICATIONS FOR DISPENSARIES BY EARLY JUNE.. AND IT HAS UNTIL SEPTEMBER TO GRANT THEM TO THOSE WHO MEET REQUIREMENTS.

SUPPORTERS OF LEGAL "MARIJUANA- FOR-FUN" PRAISE THE OFFICIALS FOR THEIR EFFICIENCY, AND THEY SAY LEGAL SALES COULD BEGIN BEFORE SEPTEMBER.

MEANWHILE, ANY CHANGES TO THE LAW BY THE STATE LEGISLATURE HAVE GONE NOWHERE.

DARREL ROWLAND, THIS PROCESS IS MOVING MUCH MORE SLOWLY -- SMOOTHLY THEN THE PROCESS FOR MEDICAL MARIJUANA.

TEAMS TO TAKE FOREVER.

>> SECOND TIME AROUND.

SOMEBODY MAY DISPUTE THAT.

WE ARE KIND OF GOING TO SCHOOL ON THE MEDICAL MARIJUANA PROCESS FOR SEVERAL YEARS AGO.

IN FACT, STEP ONE IS TO HAVE THE MEDICAL MARIJUANA CURRENTLY LICENSED FACILITIES BE THE FIRST ONES TO USE THE RECREATIONAL MARIJUANA.

SO THEY ARE KNOWN TO GO THROUGH VARIOUS PROCEDURES FOR APPLICATIONS.

THE CHALLENGE MAY COME WHEN YOU GET ALL THE NEWBIES OUT THERE.

ANYTHING THE LEGISLATURE DOES HAVE TO DO , THAT THE CHALLENGE BECAUSE EVERYTHING COMES DOWN TO --WE ARE GOING TO HAVE A FIGHT OVER THE SPEAKERS.

ONE CANDIDATE SAYS YEA.

THE OTHER ONE SAYS NAY PRETTY MUCH NO MATTER WHAT.

>> WHAT OTHER RULES MIGHT BE OUT THERE?

>> WHAT WE ARE WATCHING FOR IN MAY IS THE DUAL LICENSING.

AND THIS IS WHAT HAS ALLOWED THINGS TO BE STREAMLINED.

EXISTING DISPENSARIES.

WE HAVE AROUND 100 SELLING MEDICAL WOULD NOW BE ABLE TO DO BOTH.

THEY WOULD STILL HAVE TO GET THE NEW LICENSE, BUT OBVIOUSLY THEY'VE GOT THE BRICK AND MORTAR.

THEY'VE GOT THE CUSTOMER BASE AND THE BUSINESSES ARE ALREADY STARTED UP.

AND SO THAT IS THE ONE WE ARE LOOKING FOR MOST IMMEDIATELY.

NOW, THE GOVERNOR ALSO WANTS TO SEE THAT SMOKING IS NOT ALLOWED IN PUBLIC.

I BELIEVE THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE LEGISLATIVE AS OPPOSED TO RULEMAKING.

BUT, YOU KNOW, THERE ARE SOME OTHER THINGS AROUND IT.

BUT THEY COULD ALSO DO NOTHING.

AS DARREL SAYS, THE LEGISLATURE IS SOMEWHAT DIVIDED OVER HOW TO PROCEED ON ANY LEGISLATION.

>> DOES THE FACT THAT THIS PAST FAIRLY EASILY IN NOVEMBER -- ALONG MORE QUICKLY?

IT WASN'T A TOSSUP.

55-45.

>> YEAH.

NOT CONTROVERSIAL.

I THINK IT SHOWED THIS WAS SOMETHING A LOT OF OHIOANS WERE LOOKING TO HAVE BROADER ACCESS TO MARIJUANA.

NOT JUST HAVE IT BE TIED TO A MEDICAL NEED.

IT IS INTERESTING ON THE DUAL LICENSING AND HOW THE APPLICATION WORKS, THERE IS A RISK HERE OF JUST INNOVATING SOME OF THE FIRST MOVERS IN THE MEDICAL MARIJUANA PROCESS THAT WASN'T THE MOST LEVEL THE PLAYING FIELD.

I WILL STILL BE LOOKING FOR THE GOVERNMENT TO TRY TO ENSURE THAT WE ARE GETTING IT WIDE SET OF STAKEHOLDERS HERE WHO ARE ABLE TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THIS NEW OPPORTUNITY.

>> HOW MUCH OF THIS INDUSTRY -- A LOT OF MONEY TO BE MADE HERE.

RIGHT NOW THAT MONEY IS BEING MADE IN MICHIGAN.

THESE INDUSTRY FOLKS PUSHING THIS TO GET THROUGH?

>> THAT IS THE ARGUMENT WE HEAR.

THEY ARE MAKING MONEY ELSEWHERE.

WHY NOT BRING IT HERE?

I THINK THE LEGISLATURE WHEN THEY DO GET AROUND TO DOING SOMETHING AND DARREL'S ANALYSIS IS CORRECT ABOUT SOME OF THE LOGJAMS IN THE HOUSE, NUMBER ONE, THE PUBLIC SMOKING.

MOST PEOPLE WHO GO TO BIG CITIES DON'T LIKE THE FACT THAT MARIJUANA IS IN THE AIR EVERYWHERE YOU WALK.

I HAVE BEEN TO CHICAGO AND BOSTON AND DETROIT.

I HAVEN'T SMELLED IT.

>> I'VE BEEN TO NEW YORK.

AND I HAVE.

MAYBE WE ARE JUST -- >> ACCESS TO CHILDREN.

CERTAINLY ANYBODY WHO WOULD ALLOW CHILDREN ACCESS TO THESE THINGS TO THE POINT WHERE THEY COULD INGEST SOME OF THE EDIBLES, IF YOU WILL, NEEDS TO FACE SERIOUS TIME.

LOOK FOR LEGISLATION IN THOSE TWO AREAS.

>> SMOKING IN PUBLIC IS NO DIFFERENT THAN DRINKING AN OPEN CONTAINER OF BEER.

IF IT IS PROHIBITED, IT IS PROHIBITED.

IS THAT STILL UP FOR DEBATE?

I CANNOT FIND A SPECIFIC PROHIBITION ABOUT SMOKING IN PUBLIC.

YOU CANNOT OPERATE A MOTOR VEHICLE.

WHEN WE HAD OUR SMOKING BAN DEBATE IN THE STATE, THE QUESTION WAS SORT OF, CAN YOU IN A RESTAURANT?

CAN YOU AT A BAR?

IT IS ENCLOSED.

BUT IT IS VENTILATED AND SO FORTH.

THINGS LIKE THAT.

WHETHER YOU CAN JUST WALKING DOWN THE STREET WOULD SEEM KIND OF HARD TO REGULATE.

>> JUST TO BE CLEAR AND PUT THINGS IN CONTEXT, I AM MUCH MORE CONCERNED ABOUT THE RISK FROM THE GAMBLING THAT NOW HAS BEEN UNLEASHED THROUGH OUR STATE AND SOME OF THE RECKLESSNESS IN DRIVING IN TERMS OF THE LEVEL OF RISK WE ARE FACING AS A STATE COMPARED TO ANY OF THE RISK, WHETHER IT IS THE PUBLIC SMOKING OTHERWISE CONNECTED TO MARIJUANA.

>> ARE YOU SURPRISED --DISPUTE BETWEEN THE SPEAKER AND SENATE PRESIDENT.

NOTHING HAS BEEN DONE TO TIGHTEN THIS UP A LITTLE BIT BY THE LEGISLATURE.

>> NOT VERY SURPRISED, TO BE HONEST WITH YOU.

YOU LOOK AT EVERYTHING FROM LAST YEAR, NO MATTER THE TOPIC , THIS LEGISLATURE MOVES AT A SNAIL'S PACE.

LEGISLATION ACROSS THE FINISH LINE.

GOVERNOR DeWINE HAS BEEN PLEADING WITH THEM.

WE NEED TO KEEP THE BLACK MARKET OUT.

WE NEED TO GET RULES ESTABLISHED.

HE WAS AGAINST IT.

THE VOTERS HAVE SPOKEN.

WE NEED TO GET THESE THINGS IN PLACE.

DEAF EARS SO FAR.

>> THERE IS ANOTHER PIECE OF THE RULEMAKING TOO, WHICH HAS TO DO WITH PREFERENTIAL TREATMENT FOR PEOPLE WHO HAD PREVIOUS CONVICTIONS OR FAMILIES AND OTHER SORTS OF POTENTIAL GROUPS THAT COULD BENEFIT FROM THE LICENSES.

THAT IS A DIFFERENT DEPARTMENT AND A DIFFERENT SET OF RULES.

THEY ARE STILL BEING WAITED FOR.

SO IT IS A LITTLE BIT UNCLEAR.

DOESN'T GO QUITE AS FAST AS WE THINK.

BUT IT COULD.

>> THE INITIAL OPENING OF SALES.

WOULD THAT BE DOWN THE ROAD FOR FUTURE LICENSES?

>> I THINK IT COULD HOLD IT UP.

IF THEY ARE GETTING PREFERENTIAL TREATMENT, THEY WOULD HAVE TO GO FIRST.

RUNNING INTO THE MARKET THAT EVERYBODY HAS ALREADY ESTABLISHED, THAT WOULD NOT REALLY MEET THAT.

>> I THINK THE KEY POINT ABOUT LEGISLATURES IS IT IS NOT A SUBSTANTIVE DECISION .

I THINK A LOT OF THE LEGISLATORS WANT TO TAKE ACTION.

THIS IS ONCE AGAIN CREATING BLOCKADES FOR LEADERSHIP.

THAT IS WHY IT SEEMS NOTHING IS MOVING.

IT IS NOT A SUBSTANTIVE REJECTION BY LEGISLATORS WANTING TO LEGISLATE THIS AREA.

>> IT WOULD HAVE VIOLATED THE ONE ISSUE RULE.

BUT THE EXPUNGEMENT OF CRIMES, CONVICTIONS.

THEY WOULD NO LONGER BE CRIMES.

BUT WITH THIS LEGISLATURE, YOU CANNOT BE OPTIMISTIC THAT IS GOING TO HAPPEN.

>> I THINK I WOULD CHALLENGE -- YOU KNOW, WE CAN DEBATE THE UTILITY OF TERM LIMITS OR NOT.

I HAVE BEEN ON THE RECORD BEFORE I WOULD SELF-IMPOSED TERM LIMITS IF I WERE ELECTED.

BUT I DON'T THINK THAT SHOULD BE A PASS FOR WHAT WE ARE SEEING IN THE OHIO STATE LEGISLATURE AT THIS POINT.

IT IS A COMPLETE ABDICATION OF DUTY TO SERVE THE PUBLIC FROM A LOT OF THE FOLKS WE ARE FINDING THERE.

ESPECIALLY ON ONE SIDE OF THE AISLE.

IT IS A REAL SHAME BECAUSE WE HAVE PRESSING PROBLEMS IN OHIO BEYOND JUST MARIJUANA.

LOTS OF DIFFERENT ISSUES, AND IT DOESN'T SEEM TO BE A PRIORITY FOR THEM TO DO THEIR JOB.

>> I'M NOT SURE HOW PRESSING IT IS, BUT IT TURNS OUT OHIO IS NOT THE ONLY STATE THAT MAY EXCLUDE JOE BIDEN FROM ITS BALLOT IN NOVEMBER.

LIKE AS IS THE CASE IN OHIO, ALABAMA'S DEADLINE FOR QUALIFYING FOR THE BALLOT COMES BEFORE THE DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL CONVENTION IN AUGUST.

TO GET ON THE BALLOT, DEMOCRATS WOULD HAVE TO CHANGE HOW OR WHEN THEY NOMINATE PRESIDENT BIDEN OR OHIO WOULD HAVE TO CHANGE STATE LAW TO EXTEND THE DEADLINE.

THE STATE LEGISLATURE DID JUST THAT IN 2012 AND 2020 WHEN CONVENTIONS HAPPENED AFTER THE DEADLINE.

THIS WEEK, SENATE PRESIDENT MATT HUFFMAN TOLD REPORTERS IT WOULD BE SOLVED ONE WAY OR ANOTHER.

CARR SMYTH, IS THIS MUCH ADO ABOUT NOTHING?

>> I THINK IT MIGHT BE.

I THINK DEMOCRATS HAVE A NUMBER OF OPTIONS HERE.

ONE IS TO MAYBE TAKE THAT LITTLE PIECE OF THEIR CONVENTION .

THEY HAD TO DO DURING COVID ANYWAY.

OR THERE IS ALSO THE OPTION THAT THEY MIGHT LITIGATE THIS.

WE ALL ARE FAMILIAR WITH THE FACT THAT THIS 14th AMENDMENT SERIES OF LAWSUITS CAME ABOUT TRYING TO KEEP DONALD TRUMP OFF BALANCE.

THE U.S. SUPREME COURT HAS SPOKEN ON THAT , WHICH WOULD MAKE IT SEEM TO ME MORE LIKELY THAT THEY WOULD HAVE A WINNING ARGUMENT THAT STATES CANNOT MESS WITH THESE FEDERAL CANDIDATES.

>> IT SEEMS LIKE MATT HUFFMAN --HIS TONE HAS CHANGED A LITTLE BIT.

THIS IS A DEMOCRATIC PROBLEM AT FIRST.

NOW HE IS SAYING, LOOK , WE ARE NOT GOING TO KEEP JOE BIDEN OFF THE BALLOT.

SEEMS LIKE HE DOESN'T WANT TO DEAL WITH THIS.

>> LAWYERS IN OHIO.

OHIO LAWS AVAILABLE FOR ANYBODY TO LOOK UP ON THE INTERNET AND READ.

WHEN TO HAVE THEIR CONVENTION.

IT IS THEIR JOB TO KNOW HOW YOU GET ON THE BALLOT IN EACH STATE.

THE NOTION THAT THEIR STATE -- MISTAKE NEEDS TO BE OHIO'S PROBLEM IS RIDICULOUS.

HAVING SAID THAT, DONALD TRUMP WILL WIN OHIO WHETHER JOE BIDEN IS ON THE BALLOT OR NOT.

I DON'T THINK REPUBLICANS WORRY ABOUT JOE BIDEN BEING ON THE BALLOT.

>> SHOULD JOE BIDEN NOT BE ON THE BALLOT?

WHAT IT REALLY AFFECT GERMAN BROWN AND HIS TURNOUT OR HIS HE POPULAR ENOUGH AMONG HIS BASE TO GET THE TURNOUT?

>> IT DOES SEEM LIKE THOSE WILL BE VERY DIFFERENT RACES.

WE ARE NOT FACING A COMPETITIVE PRESIDENTIAL RACE IN OHIO BY ANY MEANS.

BUT I DO THINK THE NARRATIVE HERE MATTERS.

WE SAW WHEN THIS ISSUE FIRST DROPPED THAT THERE WOULD BE THE ATTEMPT TO TRY TO EQUATE SOME OF WHAT WAS HAPPENING WHETHER OR NOT WE WOULD HAVE PRESIDENT BIDEN.

PROCEDURAL ISSUE ON THE OHIO THE BALLOT THIS IS THE CASE THAT WENT TO THE SUPREME COURT, WHICH REALLY WAS ABOUT FORMER PRESIDENT TRUMP ENGAGING IN BEHAVIOR THAT UNDERMINED THE ELECTORAL PROCESS WHEN HE WAS NOT ABLE TO BE SUCCESSFUL.

THOSE ARE TWO VERY DIFFERENT THINGS.

IF YOU'RE NOT PAYING CLOSE ATTENTION, THERE IS A CHANCE TO COMPLETE THEM.

>> WHO SHOULD DECIDE?

SHOULD IT BE THE VOTERS OR THE SECRETARY OF STATE'S OFFICES IN THESE STATES?

WHO SHOULD BE ON THE BALLOT AND WHO SHOULD RUN FOR PRESIDENT?

>> EXACTLY.

>> THE LAW IS THE LAW.

THAT IS THE THING.

>> TRUMP'S CONTENTION WAS -- >> CAN WE CHANGE THE LAW, IS A DIFFERENT QUESTION FROM, SHOULD SOMEBODY THAT WANTS TO BE ON THE BALLOT HAVE TO READ THE CODE AND THEN FOLLOW THE CODE?

THE ANSWER HAS BEEN YES.

>> BUT THERE IS ALSO PRECEDENT FOR ACCEPTING A PROVISIONAL NOMINATION THAT IS AN UPDATE FROM THE CONVENTION BOTH IN OHIO AND OTHER STATES, AS I UNDERSTAND IT.

>> COULD THEY JUST STICK THIS ON THE CAPITAL BUDGET THAT WILL BE VOTED ON SOON?

>> THE STATE BUDGET.

2012.

>> THEY COULD DO IT.

EITHER WAY THEY WANT.

>> HOW ABOUT A PERMANENT CHANGE?

A PERMANENT CHANGE FOR PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES.

60 DAYS.

NOT 90 DAYS BEFORE THE ELECTION.

>> I DON'T KNOW.

THAT IS BORDERING ON COMMON SENSE , MIKE.

WE'RE GETTING CLOSE TO THE LINE HERE.

>> THIS WEEK THE OHIO SUPREME COURT RULED THAT SOME DEATH RECORDS ARE NOT SUBJECT TO PUBLIC DISCLOSURE.

THIS CASE DATES BACK TO THE START OF THE COVID PANDEMIC WHEN FORMER DISPATCHER -- DISPATCH REPORTER RANDY LUDLOW TRY TO GET CAUSE OF DEATH INFORMATION AND THE NAMES AND ADDRESSES OF PEOPLE WHO DIED.

THE STATE REFUSED AND LUDLOW SUED.

THE COURT RULED THE NAMES AND ADDRESSES COMBINED WITH MEDICAL INFORMATION WOULD VIOLATE THE PRIVACY OF THE DECEASED.

LUDLOW AND OTHER REPORTERS WANTED THE INFORMATION TO KNOW HOW MANY PEOPLE DYING FROM COVID WERE IN NURSING HOMES, AND, IN PARTICULAR, WHICH NURSING HOMES.

THE STATE WAS UNWILLING TO IDENTIFY THE EXACT NURSING HOMES WHERE THE DEATHS OCCURRED, SO WE DID NOT KNOW A BETTER JOB THAN OTHERS IN CONTROLLING COVID.

SHOULD PRIVACY FOLLOW YOU TO THE GRAVE?

>> I THINK IF THE STATE LEGISLATURE ONCE IT TOO, THEY CAN PASS THAT.

HE WROTE THIS OPINION.

I READ IT CAREFULLY.

HIS ARGUMENT WAS NOT ONE BASED ON POLICY.

HE SAID WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE STATUTES, THEY DON'T ALLOW THIS TO HAPPEN.

YOUR PROTECTED HEALTH INFORMATION, WHICH FOLLOWS YOU TO THE GRAVE.

THE LEGISLATURE HAS THE ABILITY TO CHANGE THAT.

JUSTICE FISHER'S DECISION SIMPLY SAID, GO TO THE LEGISLATURE AND ASK THEM TO CHANGE THIS.

DON'T ASK US TO CHANGE IT BY LOOKING AROUND THE STATUTE.

>> YOU WERE WORKING WITH RANDY AT THE TIME OF THIS DISPUTE.

WHAT WAS THE ATTITUDE AMONG YOU AND HIM ?

>> OH, YEAH.

THIS WAS THE PROCESS .

I PERSONALLY NEGOTIATED WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH TO TRY TO GET THESE RECORDS.

I SHOULD HAVE DOCUMENTED THE PROCESS OF EXCUSES FROM CAN'T NAME IT.

IT WAS, CAN'T DO IT.

AND THEN IT TURNED OUT TO BE THE TRUTH WAS, WON'T DO IT.

I THINK WE HAVE CONTRADICTORY PARTS OF IT ALL.

YOU ARE THE LAWYER.

I ONLY PLAYED ONE ON TV.

BUT THE THING THAT I THINK FOR YOUR AVERAGE JOE AND JANE, THERE IS A BOB AND BETTY.

IS THAT ON WOSU AS WELL?

ALL RIGHT.

ALL RIGHT.

WHOMEVER.

ANYHOW, WHEN THEY HEAR THAT THESE RECORDS ARE PUBLIC INDIVIDUALLY --SO THE PROPHECY DOES NOT FOLLOW YOU JUST TO THE GRAVE, BUT IN THE GRAVE.

PUT THEM ALL TOGETHER IN A DATABASE.

IT DOES.

>> IF YOU'RE ASKING FOR JOE SMITH DEATH CERTIFICATE, YOU'RE GIVING HIS NAME TO THE OFFICE THAT HOLDS THE DEATH CERTIFICATE.

THAT IS ONE STATUTE.

THEIR NAME.

GIVE US HOW THEY DIED, WHO THE --WHO DIED.

TWO DIFFERENT STATUTES.

TWO DIFFERENT PURPOSES.

YOU SAY YOU HAVE THE NAME ALREADY.

I'M GOING TO GET MY MOTHER'S DEATH CERTIFICATE.

I KNOW HER NAME.

>> PRIVACY IS IMPORTANT.

BUT ALSO THE PUBLIC IN RIGHT TO KNOW WHICH FACILITIES ARE DOING A BETTER JOB THAN OTHERS.

IT IS VERY IMPORTANT.

SPRING OF 2020.

>> FOR SURE.

I DO A LOT OF WORK ON TECH POLICY.

TECH ISSUES.

DIVERSEY.

WHOLEHEARTEDLY SUPPORT PROTECTING OUR PRIVACY.

IT IS HARD TO UNDERSTAND THE POLICY JUSTIFICATION HERE AND NOT EXTENDING WHAT IS AVAILABLE FOR INDIVIDUAL REQUESTS TO THE LARGER PUBLIC.

ESPECIALLY LOOKING AT NOT JUST IF YOU WANT TO DO ANALYSIS ON COVID BUT A WHOLE HOST OF HEALTH ISSUES AND TRENDS TO SEE ACROSS THE STATE AREAS THAT WE NEED TO DO DIFFERENT TARGETING OF RESOURCES.

OF INTEREST TO THE GOVERNMENT.

AS WE HAVE ALREADY DISCUSSED, THIS IS WHERE IT IS A BIT OF A QUAGMIRE FOR US IN OHIO.

IF THE STATUTE DOESN'T SAY IT, WE SHOULD CHANGE THE STATUTE.

WHERE DO THE PEOPLE GO?

>> THIS LEGISLATURE.

WHEN WAS THE LAST TIME YOU CAN RECALL A LEGISLATIVE BODY MAKING RECORDS MORE OPEN?

>> WELL, WE HAVE PRETTY GOOD RECORDS LAWS IN THIS SKATE COMPARATIVELY.

BUT YOU ARE RIGHT.

WE HAVE NOT SEEN A REAL SIGNIFICANT REWRITE OR ADDITION IN QUITE SOME TIME.

ALL MY TIME HERE.

20 PLUS YEARS.

>> THE BIGGEST CHANGES WHEN THE LEGISLATURE STARTED THE PROCESS , WHICH THE DISPATCH USED.

YOU DON'T NEED TO HIRE A LAWYER AND SUE.

YOU CAN FILE AN APPLICATION AND BE IN MEDIATION IN A FEW WEEKS.

THAT WAS A TEST --PLUS FOR OPENNESS.

>> THE NEWSPAPER USED THAT PROCESS TO SUCCESSFULLY GET SOME RECORDS OPEN.

I ASKED ABOUT JENNIFER'S ARGUMENT THAT THE FEDERAL DEFINITION OF AN INDIVIDUAL IS SOMEONE WHO BREEDS AND HAS A BEATING HEART.

IF YOU ARE DEAD, YOU ARE NO LONGER AN INDIVIDUAL AND THUS THE RIGHTS DON'T APPLY.

>> WHEN THE JUSTICE CITES ANOTHER BODY OF LAW, YOU KNOW IT IS BECAUSE THEY DON'T HAVE ANY BODY OF LAW -- >> STATE LAW.

>> FEDERAL LAW UNDER THE SUPREMACY CLAUSE WHEN THERE IS A CONSTANT --WE HAVE OUR OWN BODY OF STATE LAW.

PUBLIC RECORDS LAW IS LARGELY STATE LAW.

NOT FEDERAL LAW.

>> I WAS CURIOUS, DARREL, IF THERE WERE CONVERSATIONS ABOUT REDACTING VARIOUS PIECES OF THIS .

I'M SURE THERE WERE.

WE WILL GET AT THE HEALTH ISSUE.

>> IN EFFECT WE GOT THE DATABASE WITHOUT THE NAMES AND ADDRESSES.

BUT THAT IS USEFUL BUT THAT DOES NOT SHOW YOU WHAT WE WANT TO FIND OUT.

TO LOOK AT THE HEALTH RECORDS OF OHIOANS.

THESE NURSING HOMES.

A LOT OF PEOPLE ARE DYING.

THESE NURSING HOMES, THEY ARE DOING PRETTY WELL.

WE HAVE BECOME SO MUCH MORE CONSCIOUS IN PROVIDING THAT OPENNESS AND INFORMATION TO CONSUMERS .

GOVERNOR DeWINE THIS YEAR.

NEW RATINGS FOR NURSING HOMES.

MORE DETAIL.

THIS IS THE MOST SERIOUS PANDEMIC IN ANY OF OUR LIVES.

WE ARE NOT SHARING THE INFORMATION WITH THE PUBLIC.

>> COULD YOU ASK FOR THE NAMES TO BE REDACTED AND JUST GIVE US THE ADDRESS?

>> HERE IS THE PROBLEM.

WHAT ADDRESS DID THEY LIST?

YOU NEED TO MATCH THEM UP.

EVEN THEN, IT IS VERY CHALLENGING.

A SMALL PART OF ME SAYS, THANK GOODNESS THEY TURNED THAT DOWN BECAUSE THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN SO MUCH DATA ANALYSIS.

BUT IT WOULD HAVE BEEN WORTH IT.

>> LET'S GET TO OUR LAST TOPIC.

DESPITE A COURT RULING AND LEGISLATURE AVERSE TO STATEWIDE BANS, GOVERNOR DEWINE'S PUSH TO REGULATE SOCIAL MEDIA AND SMART PHONES CONTINUES.

THE GOVERNOR HAS CALLED ON STATE LAWMAKERS TO CONSIDER A BILL THAT WOULD REQUIRE SCHOOLS TO REGULATE SMART PHONE USE.

>> A NUMBER OF OHIO SCHOOLS HAVE MADE THE DECISION TO ELIMINATE SMARTPHONE USE DURING THE SCHOOL DAY, AND I BELIEVE CLEARLY THAT IS THE RIGHT DECISION.

THESE PHONES ARE CLEARLY DETRIMENTAL TO LEARNING.

THEY ARE DETRIMENTAL TO OUR CHILDREN'S MENTAL HEALTH.

AND THEY TRULY DO NEED TO BE REMOVED FROM OUR CLASSROOMS IN OHIO.

>> THE OHIO LAW THAT WOULD REQUIRE SOCIAL MEDIA COMPANIES TO GET PARENTS ' PERMISSION FOR USERS UNDER THE AGE OF 16 IS ON HOLD BECAUSE OF A FEDERAL COURT RULING.

THE GOVERNOR CALLED ON LAWMAKERS TO CRAFT A NEW LAW THAT WOULD WIN COURT APPROVAL.

ON THE CELL PHONE BAN OR SMART PHONE --I KEEP CALLING THEM CELL PHONES.

SMART PHONE BAN IN SCHOOLS.

SHOULD THE STATE REGULATE?

>> THIS IS A TRICKY ISSUE.

I DO FIND MYSELF IN THE SOMEWHAT UNUSUAL POSITION OF TO AN EXTENT AGREEING WITH GOVERNOR DeWINE ON THE RISKS OF SOCIAL MEDIA AND SMART PHONE USAGE AT VERY YOUNG AGES.

WE KNOW ALREADY THAT IS HAVING A DETRIMENTAL IMPACT, ESPECIALLY AS YOUNG PEOPLE ARE HITTING THEIR TEENAGE YEARS.

AND I DO THINK WE SHOULD BE VERY THOUGHTFUL ABOUT HOW MUCH ACCESS WE ARE ALLOWING THEM.

I THINK PART OF THE RISK, THOUGH, IN GOING TOO BROADLY HERE IS THAT DEPENDING ON THE SCHOOL DISTRICT A LOT OF STUDENTS, THE CLASSROOM MIGHT BE THEIR ONLY EXPOSURE AND ACCESSIBILITY TO TECHNOLOGY.

LEARNING HOW TO USE DIFFERENT TECHNOLOGICAL RESOURCES AND GET UP TO SPEED ON THAT.

SO JUST A WHOLE SALE BAN IS NOT THE BEST APPROACH.

THE ONLY OTHER POINT I WOULD MAKE IS I THINK IN THE INITIAL DISCUSSION OF POLICY WE WERE TALKING ABOUT TIKTOK IN PARTICULAR AS ONE OF THE MOST PROBLEMATIC SOCIAL MEDIA PLATFORMS.

I THINK THEY ARE ALL QUITE PROBLEMATIC, REGARDLESS OF THEIR PARENT COMPANY WE NEED TO BE THINKING ABOUT THAT.

>> AGREEING.

I THINK EVERYTHING MORGAN SAID IS EXACTLY CORRECT.

PARTICULARLY YOUNG GIRLS.

WE KNOW STUDIES SHOW THEY ARE AFFECTED BY WHAT THEY SEE ON SOCIAL MEDIA.

THE GOVERNMENT SHOULD NOT BE CONTROLLING WHAT THEY DO WHEN THEY GET HOME, BUT THEY DO HAVE TECHNOLOGY IN THE CLASSROOM.

THEY HAVE LAPTOPS.

THEY HAVE iPADS.

THE NOTION OF HAVING A PHONE ALL DAY LONG RAISES ALL SORTS OF PROBLEMS, NOT JUST FOR LEARNING BUT FOR SELF-IMAGE, SELF-CONFIDENCE, AND I DON'T THINK THE PEOPLE WHO AREN'T AWARE OF WHAT KIDS DO NOWADAYS, THERE ARE YOUNGSTERS --PEOPLE UNDER 20 --WHO CANNOT BE AWAKE --AWAY FROM THEIR PHONE FOR A FEW HOURS WITHOUT PANICKING.

AT THE VERY LEAST BEING USED TO BEING AWAY FROM IT FROM 8:00 TO 3:00 MIGHT BE A GREAT WAY TO SHOW THEM, LIFE GOES ON WITHOUT YOUR PHONE IN YOUR HEAD.

>> THERE ARE PEOPLE UNDER 50 THAT CANNOT BE AWAY FROM IT THAT LONG.

STATEWIDE BANDS THEY LIKE TO IMPOSE LEGISLATURE.

IS THIS ONE YOU ARE WILLING TO DO?

THEY ARE REALLY TARGETING SCHOOLS RIGHT AT THE MOMENT.

I DO JUST FIND IT KIND OF CURIOUS BECAUSE ANY SENSIBLE CAN --PRINCIPAL CAN KEEP PHONES OUT OF THEIR SCHOOL OR OUT OF THE CLASSROOM.

MAYBE YOU WANT TO DO AN EXPERIMENT AND MAYBE YOU NEED TO USE IT.

I DON'T KNOW THAT EVERY CHILD IN OHIO HAS A COMPUTER AT THEIR SCHOOL.

SO IT JUST SEEMS AS MORGAN SAID OF VERY FRAUGHT SITUATION.

>> HOW ABOUT THE HOME RULE ISSUED?

WHY NOT LEAVE IT TO THE DISTRICT TO DO IT?

THE DISTRICTS WANT THE STATEWIDE BAN TO COVER THE SCHOOL BOARD COMPLAINTS FROM PARENTS.

>> WELL, I THINK THAT WOULD BE A HELP.

ONE OF THE ARGUMENTS AGAINST THIS CONCEPT IS SCHOOLS CAN DO IT RIGHT NOW ON THEIR OWN.

THEY DON'T NEED ANYTHING --THE STATE LEGISLATURE OR THE GOVERNOR --TO DO ANYTHING.

YOU CAN DO THE EXACT SAME BAN RIGHT NOW.

AND GUESS WHAT .

WE GO BACK TO THE SPEAKER'S RACE.

WHEN I SPEAK ABOUT THE SPEAKER'S RACE, SENATE PRESIDENT MATT HUFFMAN .

HIS TERM LIMIT.

HE WANTS TO BE SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE.

JASON STEVENS.

HE WOULD LOVE TO HAVE ANOTHER TERM.

ONE SAYS ONE THING.

IN THIS CASE, HUFFMAN SAYS, YEAH, WE SHOULD REGULATE.

JASON STEVENS SAYS, NO.

SCHOOLS CAN ALREADY DO IT.

WORRIED ABOUT BIG BROTHER IN COLUMBUS AND ALL THAT.

AGAIN, HERE WE SIT.

HE IS NOT THE ENTIRE CAUCUS IN THE LEGISLATURE.

AGAIN, USE ALL RIGHT HERE IT IS NOT A PARTISAN DIVIDE SORT OF THING HERE.

SO REALLY INTERESTING TO SEE THIS ONE.

>> CAN THEY MAKE A NEW LAW THAT WOULD ON SOCIAL MEDIA -- PARENTAL PERMISSION.

THE JUDGE SAID THIS WAS TOO BLUNT.

REMARKABLY BLUNT, HE SAID.

THERE IS A MOVE TO CREATE A NEW LAW.

CAN THEY DO THAT?

PEOPLE TO WANT PARENTAL PERMISSION FOR SOCIAL MEDIA, BUT FOR THESE COMPANIES TO HAVE DIFFERENT RULES STATE-BY-STATE, YOU MIGHT BE PINGING OFF CELL TOWERS IN ANOTHER STATE.

IT IS VERY HARD TO ENFORCE.

LOGISTICAL PROBLEMS SEPARATE AND APART FROM THE POLICY ISSUE, WHICH I THINK IS A GOOD IDEA TO HAVE RENTAL PERMISSION.

IT IS JUST HARD TO INVOICE.

>> TOO MUCH BLAME TO SOCIAL MEDIA FOR SOCIAL ANXIETY AMONG KIDS?

>> NO.

I THINK THESE ARE SOME OF THE MOST PROBLEMATIC COMPANIES FACING US GLOBALLY AND THEY SHOULD BE HEAVILY REGULATED.

AND WE NEED TO BE CONSIDERING STRUCTURAL SOLUTIONS TO MAKE SURE THEY DON'T HAVE SO MUCH POWER OVER OUR YOUNG PEOPLE BECAUSE THEY ARE DOING A LOT OF DAMAGE NOT ONLY TO OUR YOUNG PEOPLE BUT ALSO TO OUR ECONOMY AND PREVENTING.

>> YOU ARE UP FIRST.

>> THIS WEEK IN CHICAGO, THE FREE PRESS, WHICH IS A GREAT NEW BALANCED PRESS OUTLET, SENT A REPORT TO A MEETING OF PEOPLE PLANNING TO COME TO THE DEMOCRATIC CONVENTION IN CHICAGO AND SHUTTING IT DOWN.

THE PRACTICE SHOUTING DEATH TO AMERICA, DEATH TO ISRAEL, AND HOW TO GET AROUND THE LAW TO CAUSE REAL MAYHEM.

I'M WORRIED IT COULD BE A REPEAT OF 1968.

>> MORGAN.

>> IN THE COMING WEEK WE WILL PROBABLY --IT SEEMS LIKE SEE A FINAL RULE ON NONCOMPETE AGREEMENTS FROM THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT THAT PREVENT PEOPLE FROM SWITCHING EMPLOYERS, SETTING BUSINESSES IN THEIR AREA OF EXPERTISE.

IT WILL BE INTERESTING TO SEE HOW THAT WILL IMPACT OUR EMPLOYERS AND WORKERS THROUGHOUT OHIO.

>> JULIE.

>> I'M WATCHING THE LEGISLATIVE SESSIONS COMING ON WEDNESDAY AND PARTICULARLY LOOKING AT A BILL THAT COULD RESOLVE A PROBLEM ON ENERGY EFFICIENCY .

IT HAS BEEN IN THE WORKS FOR OVER A YEAR.

AND THERE IS A POSSIBILITY MAYBE IT WILL GET A VOTE.

>> ALL RIGHT.

>> I HAVE BEEN COVERING THE CITY A LOT.

SOMEBODY FROM CIRCLEVILLE CALLED IT CIRCUS VILLE.

IT HAS KIND OF LIVED UP TO THAT MONIKER.

HE WAS ASKED TO COME IN AND LOOK AT ALL OF THESE FINANCIAL IRREGULARITIES.

HE DECIDED HE IS NOT GOING TO DO THAT BECAUSE THE ALLEGATIONS DID NOT RISE TO THE LEVEL OF A CRIME.

>> THIS IS INVOLVING THAT DEPARTMENT DOWN THERE.

I WILL END WITH A BIBLE READING.

MY SON, BEWARE OF ANYTHING BEYOND THESE OF MAKING MANY BOOKS.

THERE IS NO END AND MUCH STUDY IS A WEARINESS OF THE FLESH, PROVING THAT FEAR OF MEDIA AND TECHNOLOGY DATES BACK TO THE OLD TESTAMENT.

WE HAVE BEEN HERE BEFORE.

THAT'S "COLUMBUS ON THE RECORD" FOR THIS WEEK.

CONTINUE THE CONVERSATION ON FACEBOOK.

AND YOU CAN WATCH US ANYTIME ON OUR WEBSITE, WOSU.ORG/COTR, YOUTUBE, AND ALSO ON THE PBS VIDEO APP.

I'M MIKE THOMPSON.

HAVE A GOOD WEEK.