This is an archived article and the information in the article may be outdated. Please look at the time stamp on the story to see when it was last updated.

Three issues regarding Medical Marijuana are on the November ballot.  One of those Constitutional Amendments is controversial because of how it`s structured and where the money would go if passed.  Amendment 3 has been getting criticized by public policy groups, health advocacy organizations, and even lawmakers.  But the driving force behind the proposed Amendment says there is a lot of misinformation floating around.

Dr. Brad Bradshaw, a trial attorney, and physician from Springfield, Missouri, helped write the ballot language and has been largely funding the effort to get it passed.  He says that he is pushing the effort to create a world-class cancer research center in Missouri, along with providing up to 10,000 jobs surrounding medical marijuana and related interests.  He claims that people who say that he will be the largest beneficiary of medical marijuana tax money are false. “People think I`m actually going to make money off of this,” he says.  “But it`s actually written into the constitutional amendment that the person who serves in the spot where I will be temporarily, will be unpaid.”

Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft says he also has concerns about the language of the ballot, where one person, or organization, stands to gain financially, and it would be written into law.  “That`s the trouble with putting it in the constitution.  I think the constitution should be very broad language,” says Ashcroft.   But Bradshaw says that criticism is unwarranted.  “I wouldn`t be in charge of (the tax dollars), the board would be in charge of it.”  He says that a board of directors who understand medicine are actually preferential to a group of lawmakers to oversee the money.  “That board would be some of the best and brightest scientists, so there will be people extremely bright people running the board and money.”  He adds, “They would be preferable because we know politicians don’t manage money very well.”

Bradshaw also claims that the opposing initiative, Amendment 2, is a pathway toward recreational marijuana use because a larger host of medical conditions would be covered and “2” also has a home-grow aspect.  Representatives from A News Approach Missouri, which are behind Amendment 2, say that claim is baseless because it will be overseen and administered by the Department of Health and Senior Services.

As with all the ballot initiatives, you certainly need to do your research prior to voting.  The wording on the ballot you will see on Election Day is a fraction of the entire proposed Amendment.  You can read more about it on our 2018 Voters Guide.