>>> THE COUNTDOWN TO LEGAL MARIJUANA.

♪♪ >>> WELCOME TO "COLUMBUS ON THE RECORD."

THURSDAY IS THE DAY RECREATIONAL MARIJUANA BECOMES LEGAL IN THE STATE OF OHIO.

THE VOTER-APPROVED LAW TAKES EFFECT DECEMBER 7th UNLESS LAWMAKERS MOVE TO CHANGE IT OR OUTRIGHT REPEAL IT, UNDOING THE WILL OF THE VOTERS IS UNLIKELY.

BUT CHANGES COULD HAPPEN AND LAWMAKERS WILL HAVE TO ACT QUICKLY.

WE'LL GET TO THAT IN A MOMENT.

FIRST, IT'S REALLY KIND OF AN EXTRAORDINARY MOMENT.

BY THE END OF NEXT WEEK, THE DEVIL'S LETTUCE WILL BE LEGAL IN THE STATE OF OHIO.

>> IT WILL BE.

AND WE DON'T NECESSARILY HAVE A INFRASTRUCTURE AS TO HOW TO MANAGE THAT -- >> SOMEONE WHO HAS WORKED IN THE COURT SYSTEM FOR YOUR WHOLE CAREER, HOW EXTRAORDINARY IS THIS FOR IT TO BE LEGAL NOW?

>> WHAT IS EXTRAORDINARY IS -- CLOSE TO 50 YEARS THAT I HAVE BEEN PRACTICING LAW, IT'S TRUE.

THE ENFORCEMENT HAS GONE UP AND DOWN AND, YOU KNOW, WHETHER YOU ARE A HARDENED CRIMINAL OR JUST A STUDENT IS ARGUED -- HAS BEEN ARGUED THROUGHOUT THAT HISTORY.

SO, YES, AND WE'RE FOLLOWING THE SAME DIRECTION AS I THINK 29 OTHER STATES -- >> 24.

>> 24.

IT'S NOTHING KNEW.

THE DISCUSSIONS THAT ARE TAKING PLACE IN THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY, IT COULD BE SOMETHING FAIRLY EASY TO HANDLE.

JUST LOOK AND SEE TO OUR STATE UP NORTH OR SOME PLACE ELSE AS TO HOW THEY HANDLE IT.

>> YOU'RE A PROSECUTOR AND A DEFENSE ATTORNEY.

DID YOU EVER THINK THIS DAY WOULD COME?

>> NO, I'M A LITTLE OLDER THAN JOE.

WHEN I STARTED AT THE PROSECUTOR'S OFFICE IN '71, I DON'T THINK THERE WAS A NUMBER LIKE POUNDS OR KILOS.

POSSESSION OF MARIJUANA WAS A SENTENCE -- DETERMINED WITHIN 10 TO 20.

SALE WAS 20 TO 40.

AND I CAN REMEMBER BEFORE THAT WORKING IN THE AG'S OFFICE, I WENT TO THE FEDERAL CASES SO I WOULD BE IN FEDERAL COURT IN COLUMNS AND THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, THE APPELLATE COURT IN CINCINNATI, ARGUING A CASE DOWN THERE ONE TIME.

ONE OF THE JUDGES ON THE SIXTH CIRCUIT INTERRUPTED ME AND SAID SOMETHING, HOW CAN YOU -- DIDN'T HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH THE ARGUMENT.

HOW CAN YOU JUSTIFY THIS DRACONIAN SENTENCE STRUCTURE THAT THE STATE OF OHIO HAS SET UP.

>> FOR MARIJUANA?

>> FOR MARIJUANA.

NOW SINCE THEN, IT'S BEEN A LONG TIME SINCE I'VE SEEN ANYBODY GO TO JAIL FOR MARIJUANA.

THEY JUST DON'T DO IT.

NOT BECAUSE THEY DON'T PROSECUTE THEM.

THEY DIDN'T -- >> SO JULIE WHAT HAPPENS ON THURSDAY?

THE SYSTEM IS NOT IN PLACE.

WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO WALK INTO A STORE AND BUY IT ON THURSDAY.

>> RIGHT.

WELL, I THINK THERE COULD BE A LOT OF STEPS HAPPENING IN THE LEGISLATURE.

SO IT WILL REALLY DEPEND ON THAT.

BUT WHAT WILL HAPPEN IS THAT THE PIECES THAT SAY YOU CAN POSSESS AND GROW IN YOUR HOME OR GROW IN YOUR HOME AND THEN CONSUME THAT WILL -- THAT WILL COME INTO PLAY PRESUMABLY.

AND THEN IT WILL BE LEGAL ELSE-WISE EVEN THOUGH YOU MAY NOT HAVE DISPENSARY AND IS SO FORTH TO FIND IT.

IT WILL BE TECHNICALLY LEGAL.

>> GETTING THE SEEDS OR GETTING THE MARIJUANA TO CONSUME IS KIND OF A GRAY LEGAL AREA.

ANDREW, THERE'S A -- THE LEGISLATURE DOES MEET THIS COMING WEEK AND THEY COULD MAKE CHANGES.

>> YEAH, THERE'S A BILL THAT WAS INTRODUCED THIS WEEK THAT I WOULDN'T NECESSARILY PICK AS THE VEHICLE FOR THIS SORT OF THING.

BUT THAT PROPOSAL, FOR INSTANCE, REDIRECTS THE TAX REVENUE AT CURRENTLY 10%.

REDIRECTS IT TOWARDS POLICE, FOR EXAMPLE, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT YOU HEAR REPUBLICANS SAY.

YOU ALSO HEAR THEM TALKING ABOUT INCREASING THE TAXES.

AND THEN THERE WAS A REPUBLICAN SENATOR WHO MADE THE COMMENT DURING A WEBINAR THAT NOT POSTED ON SOCIAL MEDIA WHERE HE TALKED ABOUT DELETING THE STATUTE AND REPLACING IT BY KIND OF REWRITING THE STATE'S MEDICAL STATUTE.

SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT IT'S GOING TO BE.

THE DEADLINE IS QUICKLY APPROACHING.

>> IS THERE AN APPETITE FOR DELETING IT.

THEY WON BY 14 POINTS, ISSUE TWO.

>> I THINK MOST OF THE LEGISLATORS WHO HAVE BEEN INTERVIEWED HAVE SAID THAT THAT'S NOT GOING TO HAPPEN.

IF I MAY ADD, I THINK ONE OF THE MOST PROBLEMATIC SUGGESTIONS THAT HAVE BEEN MADE ON THIS HOUSE BILL 341 IS TO ALLOW THE LOCAL CITIES, MUNICIPALS AND SO ONTO HAVE THEIR OUT RESTRICTIONS AND I THINK THAT WOULD MAKE IT -- SORT OF A HODGEPODGE ENFORCEMENT.

>> YES.

THE LAW AS PASSED BY VOTERS DOES NOT COMMUNITIES TO BAN THE SALE OR USE OF MARIJUANA.

BUT YOU CAN'T BAN PLASTIC BAGS AT GROCERY STORES, BUT THEY WANT TO ALLOW COMMUNITIES TO BAN MARIJUANA IN THEIR COMMUNITIES.

>> OR GUNS.

>> SELECTIVE HOME RULE STRIKES AGAIN.

>> SELECTIVE HOME RULE.

EXACTLY.

I DOUBT THAT PROPOSAL IS GOING TO GO ANYWHERE.

I THINK THAT THE SENSE I'M GETTING, THE GOVERNOR HAS SAID, LET'S HONOR THE VOTERS, LET'S NOT ENTIRELY REPEAL IT.

BUT THE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE HAS COME OUT THIS WEEK WITH A LIST OF DESIRES FOR FIXING PARTS OF THE TAX STRUCTURE AND OTHER LEGAL SECTIONS OF THE LAW.

>> ONE OF THE PROPOSALS IS TO PUT MORE OF THE TAX MONEY TOWARDS POLICE AND THE ARGUMENT IS THAT MARIJUANA CRIMES WILL INCREASE BECAUSE IT'S LEGAL.

IF YOU DECRIMINALIZE SOMETHING, DON'T YOU NEED FEWER POLICE OFFICERS?

>> WELL, I WOULD THINK SO.

THAT WOULD MAKE SENSE TO ME.

BUT ALL THESE SUGGESTIONS THAT WE'VE HEARD, I THINK, THE ONE THAT ANDREW MENTIONED, IF THEY DO ANYTHING, IT WILL BE REDIRECTING SOME OF THE TAX MONEY TO TRAINING POLICE.

I MEAN, I DON'T THINK THAT WOULD CAUSE A BIG PROBLEM, EVEN IF IT DOESN'T MAKE A LOT OF SENSE.

BUT I -- JUST LIKE JOE SAID, THE LEGISLATURE IS NOT GOING TO COME IN THERE AND CHANGE EVERYTHING AFTER -- DID YOU SAY 14% VICTORY IN THE LAST ELECTION.

>> ONE THING YOU HAVE TO RETRAIN ARE THE POLICE DOGS.

TRAINED TO SNIFF OUT MARIJUANA.

NOW THEY HAVE TO RETRAIN THEM -- >> I CAN HEAR THE DEFENSE ARGUMENT NOW.

I MEAN, GEEZ, THAT WAS A MISTAKE, NO, IT WASN'T A MISTAKE.

>> YOU STILL NEED SOME OF THAT.

YOU CAN'T HAVE KILOS WALKING AROUND.

THE DOG CAN SMELL KILOS.

>> HE CAN SMELL IT, YOU CAN'T ARREST THEM IF YOU FIND IT.

>> IT IS STILL ON THE FEDERAL REGISTER AS A SUBSTANCE.

THAT'S A LITTLE TRICKY, GRAY AREA TOO.

>> POTENCY IS SOMETHING THAT THEY'RE LOOKING AT, HOW STRONG THE GUMMIES ARE, HOW STRONG THE -- HOW STRONG THE THC LEVELS ARE.

>> YEAH, I CAN'T RATTLE THE NUMBERS OFF IN MY HEAD.

BUT THERE'S A NUMBER IN THE STATUTE THAT VOTERS APPROVED AND THERE'S DEBATE ABOUT LAW EXPERTS ABOUT WHETHER THAT'S A FLOOR OR A CEILING.

RATHER THAN DEBATE THAT, THE LEGISLATURE HAS THEIR IDEA OF WHAT THEY WANT IT TO BE.

WE'LL SEE WHAT THAT IS.

THAT'S AN ISSUE.

>> JULIE, DECEMBER 7th IS NOT A DEADLINE FROM THE CHANGES.

IT'S GOING TO TAKE A LONG TIME FOR THIS TO GO INTO EFFECT.

THEY CAN TINKER WITH IT FOR SEVERAL MORE MONTHS.

>> RIGHT.

AND ANOTHER AREA IS SECONDHAND SMOKE WHICH WE SAW WHEN WE ALL DEALT WITH SMOKING BANS AND THINGS LIKE THAT, WHERE YOU'LL BE ABLE TO CONSUME IT.

THOSE ARE QUESTIONS THAT THEY CAN ROLL RIGHT INTO THE NEW YEAR.

>> WEIRD DAY IN OHIO WHEN WE SEE THESE BILLBOARDS POPPING UP.

>>> THE ABORTION AMENDMENT PASSED LAST MONTH TAKES EFFECT THIS COMING WEEK AS WELL.

LAWMAKERS CANNOT MAKE CHANGES TO THAT UNLESS THEY GO BACK TO THE VOTERS.

IN THE MEANTIME, THE STATUS QUO REMAINS.

OHIO'S SIX-WEEK ABORTION BAN REMAINS ON HOLD BECAUSE OF A LEGAL CHALLENGE.

THE SUPREME COURT WILL CONSIDER ARGUMENTS FROM ATTORNEYS ON HOW THE NEW AMENDMENT AFFECTS THE SO-CALLED HEARTBEAT LAW, ALSO STILL TO BE DETERMINED WHAT HAPPENS TO OTHER REGULATIONS LIKE THE 24-HOUR WAITING PERIOD AND REQUIREMENTS THAT CLINICS HAVE PATIENT TRANSFER AGREEMENTS WITH HOSPITALS.

WE ARE IN REALLY A STATE OF LIMBO.

DO WE EXPECT ANY MAJOR LEGAL OR POLITICAL CHANGES TO OUR REGULATIONS IN THE NEXT SEVERAL MONTHS.

>> WELL, I WOULD SAY YES.

I WOULD SAY THAT THE OHIO SUPREME COURT HAS BEFORE IT REALLY THE FATE OF THE FETAL CARDIAC BAN AND SO THAT WILL -- THEY WILL BRIEF THAT BY NEXT WEEK TO SAY DOES THIS EFFECT THAT?

I THINK THAT THE PLAINTIFFS THAT BROUGHT THAT CASE ARE GOING TO SAY, ABSOLUTELY, IT MEANS IT'S NOW CONSTITUTIONAL AND IT WILL BE INTRIGUING TO SEE WHAT OUR ATTORNEY GENERAL SAYS BECAUSE HE DID ISSUE AN ANALYSIS -- AND I THINK MAYBE IT WAS IN PART AN EFFORT TO TRY TO GET PEOPLE TO BE AFRAID OF ISSUE ONE AND PASSING IT, BUT WHAT IT HAS DONE NOW, HE'S ON THE RECORD SAYING THESE THINGS ARE GOING TO GO AWAY.

THEY'RE NOT GOING TO BE LEGAL ANYMORE IN OUR STATE IF THIS PASSES.

SO WE'LL SEE WHAT HE HAS TO SAY, HOW HARD HE DECIDES TO FIGHT OR NOT.

AND THEN THE FIGHT ALSO IS IN THE FEDERAL COURT, I THINK THAT'S A LITTLE EASIER.

BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, NOW THEY CAN SAY, WELL, WE'LL JUST COMPLETELY DROP ALL OF THE FEDERAL CASES.

>> THE AMENDMENT VOTERS ON AND APPROVED BY A 14% MARGIN SAID YOU CANNOT RESTRICT ABORTION OR BAN ABORTION PRIOR TO VIABILITY.

SIX WEEKS IS PRIOR TO VIABILITY.

IT SEEMS CLEAR CUT TO ME, JOE.

>> AND IT IS.

THE WAY THAT IT STANDS NOW, UNLESS LEGISLATION IS PASSED, IT'S GOING TO BE LEFT UP TO THE ABORTION PROVIDERS OR A WOMAN SEEKING TO HAVE AN ABORTION TO THEN CHALLENGE THAT OR IF THEY GET PROSECUTED IN ANY WAY, SHAPE OR FORM, TO USE THAT AS A DEFENSE.

AND THAT'S THE REASON THAT THERE HAS TO BE -- A NEW SET OF LAWS TO -- THAT ARE GOING TO TRACK WITH THE AMENDMENT.

>> THIS IS A PRETTY NARROW -- IT'S A NARROW PART OF THE SIX-WEEK ABORTION BAN LAW THAT IS YOU AREN'T SCRUTINY.

BUT MIGHT THE COURT SAY -- MIGHT IT IN A RULING SAY BEYOND JUST THE STANDING PORTION OF THIS CASE THAT THE LAW IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL?

>> WELL, YEAH, WHAT THEY'RE BEING ASKED TO ASSESS IS WHETHER THE LOWER COURT ACTED PROPERLY AND WILL IT CONSIDER THE CONSTITUTIONAL ISSUES.

YOU CAN SEE THE OHIO SUPREME COURT BOOTING THE CASE BACK TO THE LOCAL COURT WHICH WOULD PROBABLY HAVE THE EFFECT OF HAVING IT GO -- YOU COULD SEE THEM SAYING THEY DON'T HAVE STANDING.

THAT IS A DIFFERENT ARGUMENT.

ALTHOUGH POLITICALLY, COURTS DO HAVE TO OPERATE IN A POLITICAL ENVIRONMENT IF YOU'RE GOING TO SAY AFTER VOTERS APPROVED ABORTION RIGHTS BY 14%, YOU'RE GOING TO REINSTATE THE HEARTBEAT BILL?

IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE.

>> DO YOU SEE ANY LEGISLATION COMING IN, PREGNANCY CENTERS AND THINGS LIKE THAT?

>> NOT AT THIS POINT, MIKE.

IT MAY HAPPEN IN THE FUTURE.

I DON'T -- I THINK THE LEGISLATURE AGAIN IT PASSED 57-43.

AND I THINK THAT MAKES IT VERY DIFFICULT FOR THEM TO, YOU KNOW -- FACTOR ANYTHING.

I DON'T SEE ANY MAJOR CHANGES.

I KNOW WHAT THE ATTORNEY GENERAL SAID BEFORE.

IT'S A DIFFERENT SITUATION NOW.

AND IF HE'S CONVINCED AS APPARENTLY THIS TABLE IS CONVINCED THAT THE -- IT'S NOT UNCONSTITUTIONAL, THE PREVIOUS STANDARD, I THINK HE'LL AGREE WITH THAT.

HE IS AN OFFICER OF THE COURT.

YOU CAN'T ARGUE BECAUSE YOU DON'T LIKE SOMETHING.

IT MAY BE A SMOOTHER TRANSITION THAN WE MIGHT ANTICIPATE.

>> THE STANDING ISSUE THAT ANDREW BROUGHT UP IS INTRIGUING TO ME.

WHAT THAT SAYS IS GROUPS -- CLINICS AND ABORTION PROVIDERS ARE OFTEN BRINGING THE SUITS NOW, ALMOST ALWAYS, BECAUSE A PREGNANCY IS OFTENTIMES SHORTER THAN A LEGAL BATTLE.

AND SO IF THEY WOULD SAY THAT, THAT WOULD BE AN INTRIGUING WAY TO SORT OF SHUT DOWN THE ABILITY OF WOMEN -- OF PEOPLE WITH THE MONEY, THE CLINICS, TO FIGHT EACH AND EVERY ONE OF THESE LAWS.

I GUESS WE HAVE MORE THAN 30 ON THE BOOKS THAT THEY HAVE THEIR EYE ON.

SO THAT WILL BE ONE TO WATCH.

>> SO WHERE DO WE GO POLITICALLY FROM THIS NOW?

OHIO HAS SETTLED THIS ISSUE MORE OR LESS WITH THE BALLOT.

CAN CANDIDATES -- THEY CAN'T RUN ON THIS ANYMORE?

SHERROD BROWN, STATEWIDE, THAT'S NOT GOING TO JAZZ UP HIS SUPPORTERS.

>> NO, BUT I THINK ON THE ANTIABORTION SIDE, I THINK THERE ARE SOME ARGUMENTS.

SOME ARE SAYING THAT, IN FACT, THERE IS AN IMMOBILE RIGHT TO LIFE THAT IS SOMETHING THAT IS EVEN GREATER THAN A CONSTITUTIONAL GUARANTEE.

SO YOU MIGHT HEAR SOME OF THAT ON THE POLITICAL SIDE.

NOW, WHETHER THAT WILL THEN RESULT IN TRUE LEGAL CHALLENGES, I DON'T KNOW.

>> STATE SUPREME COURT ARE ON THE BALLOT NEXT YEAR.

THIS WILL BE ISSUE NUMBER ONE PROBABLY FOR THOSE THREE CANDIDATES, TWO DEMOCRATS.

IT'S GOING TO BE ISSUE NUMBER ONE IN THAT RACE.

>> LIKE WHAT I SAID EARLIER, TECHNICALLY, THE OHIO SUPREME COURT COULD SAY THESE CLINICS DON'T HAVE A STANDING.

BUT THEY STAND FOR ELECTION NEXT YEAR.

JUDGES ARE LIMITED IN WHAT THEY'RE ABLE TO SAY ABOUT OPEN CASES AND THERE'S ALL THAT KIND OF STUFF.

CERTAINLY PEOPLE ARE GOING TO BE LOOKING AT IT THAT WAY FOR SURE.

>> GOVERNOR DeWINE AND THE LIEUTENANT GOVERNMENT, QUESTIONS IN THE NUCLEAR BAILOUT SCANDAL.

IN ADDITION TO THE CRIMINAL FACE THAT PUT LARRY HOUSEHOLDER IN PRISON, THERE ARE CIVIL LAWSUITS.

THEY'RE SUING FOR BILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN LOSSES BECAUSE OF THE SCANDAL.

ATTORNEYS FOR THE INVESTORS HAVE ASKED TO DEPOSE LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR HOUSTON THIS LATE WINTER OR SPRING ABOUT WHAT HE KNEW ABOUT THE BAIL OUT AND THE BRIBING OF HOUSEHOLDER AND OTHERS.

ATTORNEYS HAVE SUBPOENAED RECORDS FROM GOVERNOR DeWINE.

HE APPOINTED THE HEAD WHO FIRST ENERGY SAYS IT PAID MORE THAN $4 MILLION FOR A FAVORABLE REGULATORY RULINGS.

BOTH HOUSTON AND DeWINE SAY THEY CONTINUE TO COOPERATE WITH ALL REQUESTS FOR INFORMATION.

THIS IS A CIVIL CASE.

WHAT BEARING MIGHT THIS -- THE DEVELOPMENTS IN THIS CASE, THE SUBPOENAS AND THE DEPOSITION, HAVE ON A CRIMINAL CASE?

>> WELL, I DON'T THINK IT WILL HAVE ANY BEARING ON ANYBODY EXCEPT PERHAPS RANDAZZO WHO WILL DO SOMETHING -- GIVE A DEPOSITION AND FIFTH AMENDMENT RIGHTS.

I THINK THAT'S VERY LIKELY.

BUT I DON'T SEE DeWINE AND LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR HOUSTON, AS YOU INDICATED, IT'S A CIVIL MATTER.

TAXPAYERS ARE THE SHAREHOLDERS.

FIRST ENERGY IS SAYING WE LOST ALL OF THIS MONEY AND WE WANT TO SUE WHICH DOESN'T SURPRISE ME A BIT.

YOU HAVE FIRST ENERGY -- WHAT I KNOW, WHAT I READ ALL THE TIME, HAS STATED THAT THEY BROUGHT IN HOUSEHOLDER AND USED THAT WORD.

SO IT SEEMS LIKE THE PLAINTIFFS WOULD HAVE AN EXCELLENT ARGUMENT, HOW MUCH IS THE DAMAGE.

HE'S NOT GOING TO HAVE MANY PEOPLE WHO ARE GOING TO BE ON THEIR SIDE.

BUT THE GOVERNOR IS COOPERATED AS FAR AS I KNOW AND HAS -- THE LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR WILL PROBABLY HAVE TO GIVE A DEPOSITION.

THAT'S FINE.

THOSE ARE THE RULES OF LAW.

I'VE NEVER HEARD ANYTHING -- OF COURSE, I DON'T KNOW WHAT'S -- THE CASE IS STILL PENDING.

BUT I'VE NEVER HEARD ANYBODY REFLECT AT HOUSTON OR GOVERNOR DeWINE ARE INVOLVED CRIMINALLY OR SO FORTH.

I THINK THEY'LL CONTINUE TO COOPERATE AND FURNISH WHATEVER THE COURTS TELL THEM TO FURNISH.

>> ANY INDICATION THAT THE ADMINISTRATION IS WORRIED ABOUT THIS, JULIE?

>> NO, I DON'T THINK SO.

WHAT WAS INTERESTING ABOUT THE SUBPOENAS IS THEY ARE SAYING, YOU KNOW, COMMUNICATIONS BETWEEN THE GOVERNOR AND FIRST ENERGY AND RANDAZZO RELATED TO HOUSEHOLDER AND CONTRIBUTIONS AND THINGS LIKE THAT, SO I DON'T THINK THAT THEY ARE.

BUT, YOU KNOW, WE'VE ALWAYS SAID IN OUR REPORTING THAT THIS HAS GOTTEN CLOSER AND CLOSER TO THEM AS IT GETS TOWARD RANDAZZO BECAUSE WE HAD SOME PROOF EARLY ON THAT THE GOVERNOR WAS WARNED OFF OF BRINGING RANDAZZO BECAUSE OF HIS TIES TO FIRST ENERGY AND THAT WAS IGNORED.

WHEN I ASKED THE GOVERNOR ABOUT THAT, MAYBE TWO CHRISTMASES AGO, HE SAID, YOU KNOW, BASIC, THE BUCK STOPS HERE.

YOU KNOW, IT WAS MY DECISION.

I THOUGHT IT WAS A GREAT UTILITY LAWYER.

SO HE -- HE CLEARLY WAS THERE FOR HIRING THE PERSON WHO THEN ACCEPTED THE BRIBE AND HELPED FIRST ENERGY.

>> ANDREW, HAVE ATTORNEYS FOR THE SHAREHOLDERS WHO ARE SUING FIRST ENERGY, HAVE THEY ASKED TO DEPOSE THE GOVERNOR?

>> WE DON'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT THEIR INTENT.

THESE FILINGS CAME UP IN THIS REALLY ELABORATE DISCOVERY DEBATE AMONG THE PARTIES, THE SHAREHOLDERS AND RANDAZZO AND THE FIRST ENERGY EXECUTIVES.

IT'S VERY DENSE.

IT'S CLOAKED IN FILINGS AND COUNTER FILINGS.

WE DON'T KNOW.

THERE ARE REFERENCES TO THE GOVERNOR AND THE LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR, BUT IT'S KIND OF LIKE A BACKGROUND PLAYER LARGELY.

WE'LL SORT OF SEE.

>> AND I UNDERSTAND THAT THE U.S. ATTORNEY'S OFFICE IS RUNNING INTO A STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS ISSUE AS I THINK SUMMER APPROACHES, JULY OR AUGUST OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

BUT IF I WERE RANDAZZO, I WOULD BE CONCERNED.

THERE WERE A COUPLE OF THINGS HERE THAT ARE PROBLEMATIC.

I MEAN, THAT JUST I DON'T THINK WOULD SOUND GOOD TO A JURY.

HE'S RECEIVING $4.7 MILLION FOR REPRESENTING FIRST ENERGY.

AND THEN FIRST ENERGY SAYS, NO, IT WAS A BRIBE.

>> YEAH, IT WAS FROM THE START -- OR THE LAST ACT OF THE CONSPIRACY WHICH IS SOMEWHERE INTO THE FALL, THE STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS.

I GUESS IT HAS SOME WIGGLE ROOM.

TO THAT POINT, SAM RANDAZZO GOT $20 MILLION FROM FIRST ENERGY AS A CONSULTANT FOR OVER TEN YEARS.

BUT FIRST ENERGY SAYS 4 1/2 MILLION OF THAT, ROUGHLY, WAS THE BRIBE.

IS THAT GOING TO BE HARD TO PROVE THAT IT WAS PART OF HIS OVERALL $20 MILLION PACKAGE AS A HIGHLY PAID CONSULTANT FOR A LARGE, PROFITABLE UTILITY?

>> I DON'T KNOW, MIKE, BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW ALL THE FACTS IN THE CASE.

THERE ARE TWO SIDES TO THE STORY.

I WILL SAY THIS, THE GOVERNMENT -- THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT MUST BE SOMEWHAT CONCERNED WITH THAT BECAUSE IT HAS BEEN A NEAR -- NEARLY FIVE YEARS.

I THINK THE STATUTE IS FIVE YEARS.

WE'RE ROUGHLY FIVE OR SIX MONTHS FROM THAT EXPIRING.

HOUSEHOLDER HAS BEEN TO TRIAL 20 YEARS, ALL THIS, AND NOTHING HAS HAPPENED THERE.

TO ME, IF IT WAS AS BLACK AND WHITE AS FIRST ENERGY, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THEIR CREDITABILITY IS, BUT FROM WHAT THEY SAID, I THINK SOMETHING WOULD HAVE BEEN DONE BY NOW.

>> AND THEN IN A SEPARATE CASE WHICH HAS TO DO WITH THE FREEZING OF RANDAZZO'S ASSETS, HIS ATTORNEYS HAVE SAID -- FIRST ENERGY CAN SAY ANYTHING THEY WANT, THAT DOESN'T HAVE ANY BARING ON ME.

THAT'S ALL HEARSAY.

YOU KNOW, THEY STILL HAVE TO PROVE THAT.

>> FIRST ENERGY HAS ADMITTED -- OR IN THAT AGREEMENT, THAT NONE OF THE OTHERS HAVE FACED CHARGES.

>> IT'S A MORE IMPORTANT THING ON THEIR END TO MAKE THESE ADMISSIONS, GET IT BEHIND THEM, DEAL WITH THE STOCK MARKET AND ALL THAT KIND OF THING.

>>> SUPPORTERS OF CHANGING THE WAY OHIO DRAWS LEGISLATIVE DISTRICTS ARE COLLECTING SIGNATURES.

THEY WANT TO ALLOW FOR INDEPENDENT REDISTRICTING COMMISSION.

IT HAS BEGUN ITS SECOND ATTEMPT AT GETTING SIGNATURES.

THEY STOPPED THE FIRST ATTEMPT LAST MONTH AFTER IT FOUND A TYPO IN THEIR PETITION.

FIRST, WE HAVE TO MARK THE OCCASION FOR THE FIRST TIME IN THREE, FOUR YEARS, WE HAVE DISTRICTS THAT ARE CONSTITUTIONAL.

THE OHIO SUPREME COURT SAID THAT OUR DISTRICTS ARE CONSTITUTIONAL.

THAT'S A MILESTONE.

>> I'LL NITPICK.

THEY DID NOT RULE THAT -- >> THEY DIDN'T?

>> SO WHAT THEY ACTUALLY SAID, THE LAWSUIT BEGAN OVER A DIFFERENT SET OF MAPS THAT REPUBLICANS APPROVED WITHOUT DEMOCRATIC SUPPORT AND THIS MOST RECENT SET OF MAPS THAT ARE SERVED, THE OPERATIVE ONE, WERE APPROVED WITH DEMOCRATIC SUPPORT.

BUT THE LAWSUIT ITSELF IS A HOLD OVER FROM THAT ORIGINAL MAP.

WHAT THE COURT SAID WAS, WE HAVE A NEW SET OF MAPS IN FRONT OF US.

PART OF THE CHALLENGE TO THIS IS THAT REPUBLICANS RAM THIS THROUGH THEIR OWN BENEFIT.

THAT'S NOT THE FACTS ANYMORE.

THE DEMOCRATS AGREED WITH THIS.

THEY WROTE SOMETHING LIKE THE REPUBLICAN MAJORITY, WE'RE NOT RULING ON THE MERITS, THAT'S JUST AN IMPROPER VEHICLE.

LET'S SAY THEY WERE TO RE-FILE THE CASE, I THINK THEY READ THE TEA LEAVES.

IT'S EFFECTIVELY WHAT YOU SAID, BUT IT'S NOT EXACTLY WHAT THEY SAID.

>> WE'LL COUNT IT.

IT'S A CONSTITUTIONAL MAP.

WE'RE GOING TO VOTE ON ONE CYCLE.

THE TYPO WAS -- IT COST THEM THE CHANCE OF COLLECTING SIGNATURES AT THE NOVEMBER ELECTION.

THAT WAS THE BIG ISSUE THERE.

>> IT DELAYED THEM A BIT, BUT THEY GOT A VERY LARGE HEAD START.

THEY STILL HAVE UNTIL JULY TO HAVE ALL THE SIGNATURES THEY NEED TO HAVE ON THE BALLOT.

AND I THINK THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE AFTER.

>> DOES THIS HAVE THE SAME FATE, MIKE?

DO YOU THINK VOTERS PASS THIS BY A DECENT MARGIN IF IT GETS ON THE BALLOT?

>> WELL, IT'S HARD TO SAY, MIKE.

AGAIN, IT'S AN EMOTIONAL ISSUE.

PERHAPS NOT AS MUCH AS ABORTION AND MAYBE NOT AS MUCH AS MARIJUANA.

BUT THE WAY THINGS ARE GOING THE LAST ELECTION, I JUST HAVE TO PREDICT THAT IF IT GETS ON AND IT'S WORDED REASONABLY, IT WOULD HAVE A VERY GOOD CHANCE OF PASSING.

>> THE ARGUMENT -- THE GROUP THAT'S PUSHING THIS IS CITIZENS NOT POLITICIANS.

IT'S GOING TO SAY UNELECTED, UNACCOUNTABLE PEOPLE ARE GOING TO BE DRAWING THESE MAPS.

>> THIS IS SOMEBODY THAT'S BEEN BEFORE THE VOTERS BEFORE.

THIS IS SORT OF -- ALMOST A TRADITIONAL GOAROUND.

BUT I THINK WHAT MIKE SAID WAS -- I THINK WHAT'S HAPPENING IS THAT THERE ARE A NUMBER OF THINGS THAT ARE JUST HAPPENING EVERYWHERE IN THE UNITED STATES.

MAYBE EVEN WORLDWIDE.

ABORTION ISSUE, MARIJUANA, AND I THINK THIS ALSO IS ONE OF THEM.

MICHIGAN PASSED THAT, WHAT WAS IT, TWO YEARS AGO, THREE YEARS AGO.

AND APPARENTLY IT'S WORKING RELATIVELY WELL.

ACCORDING TO MY CONTACTS UP THERE.

AND IT'S ALMOST IDENTICAL TO THE OHIO ONE.

I SEE THIS ONE PASSING AS WELL.

I THINK IT WILL PASS.

>> WE'RE THE CONGRESSIONAL MEMBERS STAY ON THIS.

BECAUSE SOME OF THEM HAVE REALLY NICE DISTRICTS.

>> YEAH.

I CAN'T -- THAT'S A DIFFERENT MAP, RIGHT?

WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE LEGISLATIVE -- >> THEY WOULD DRAW BOTH, RIGHT?

>> OH, RIGHT.

WHERE DO THEY STAND ON THE REDISTRICTING ISSUE?

I THINK THAT THEY ARE PROBABLY HESITATE.

IT'S THE SAME REASON THE DEMOCRATS SUPPORTED THIS MAP TO BEGIN WITH.

IT WAS BETTER THAN THEY THOUGHT ANY FUTURE MAP WOULD BE.

JUST LET'S DROP IT HERE AND LET'S JUST BE DONE WITH IT.

>> LET'S GET TO OUR FINAL OFF THE RECORD PARTING SHOTS.

MIKE MILLER, WE'LL START WITH YOU.

>> WELL, WE'LL TALKED THE PAST YEAR OR TWO QUITE A LOT ABOUT FIRST ENERGY.

IT'S GOING TO CONTINUE FOREVER.

IF WE GO PAST THE SUBSEQUENT INDICTMENTS, WE'RE STILL GOING TO HEAR OVER AND OVER.

I THINK THERE WILL BE OTHER LAWSUITS FILED, OTHER PEOPLE THAT WE'RE INTERESTED IN.

WE'RE GOING TO GET SUBPOENAS TO TESTIFY OR GIVE DEPOSITIONS.

I THINK IT'S GOING TO GO ON FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS.

>> JOE?

>> AS WE BEGIN THE HOLIDAY SEASON AND YOU'RE MAKING YOUR LIST AND CHECKING IT TWICE, LET'S NOT FORGET THAT MANY LOCAL SERVICE ORGANIZATIONS THAT WORKED TIRELESSLY ON BEHALF OF THE MOST CHALLENGED AMONG US, THIS IS THE SEASON FOR GIVING AFTER ALL.

NOT NECESSARILY RECEIVING.

DON'T FORGET YOUR NEIGHBORS IN NEED, MAYBE YOUR ALMA MATER AND MAYBE WOSU.

>> MAYBE.

ANDREW?

>> SOMETHING THAT HAPPENED TODAY IS THAT THE OHIO REPUBLICAN PARTY ENDORSED DONALD TRUMP FOR THE ELECTION NEXT YEAR DESPITE THERE NOT BEING A SINGLE VOTE IN THE ONGOING PRESIDENTIAL PRIMARY.

IT MADE THE REPUBLICAN PARTY THE FIRST STATED PARTY IN THE COUNTRY TO ISSUE AN ENDORSEMENT.

IT SHOWS HOW A LOT OF -- THE FORMER PRESIDENT'S POLITICAL POWER COMES FROM OHIO AND HOW HE CONTINUES TO HAVE INFLUENCE.

>> JULIE?

>> BECAUSE ABORTION MIGHT NOT BE AN ISSUE.

I THINK WE'LL SEE OUR REPUBLICAN LEGISLATURE LOOK TO DO SOME OTHER THINGS TO IMPRESS VOTERS BEFORE THE MARCH PRIMARY.

IT'S AN EARLY PRIMARY.

THINGS LIKE MAYBE PASS THAT BAN ON TRANSGIRLS IN SUPPORTS AND BANS ON GENDER-AFFIRMING CARE.

>> WE HAVE A NEW PODCAST, THE POWER GRAB TELLS THE STORY OF THE SCANDAL USING THE PLAYERS' OWN WORDS.

THE POWER GRAB USES THE SECRET FBI RECORDINGS OF LARRY HOUSEHOLDER TO GIVE US A LOOK INTO THE HARDBALL POLITICS.

CHECK IT OUT WHEREVER YOU GET YOUR POLITICS.

>>> THAT IS "COLUMBUS ON THE RECORD" FOR THE WEEK.

CHECK OUT OUT ONLINE.

I'M MIKE THOMPSON.

HAVE A GOOD WEEK.