Massachusetts is in danger of becoming a vast social sciences lab for wealthy eccentrics of all types, who are abusing the state’s referendum process to push trendy causes short on common sense.

The latest case in point is Ohio billionaire Peter B. Lewis. Once jailed overnight for pot possession, he is almost singlehandedly bankrolling a ballot question that would legalize so-called medical marijuana.

And it comes on the heels of a near catastrophic 2010 ballot campaign to use the ballot box to scuttle the development of thousands of new affordable apartments.

That effort was bankrolled by a shadowy New Hampshire group with a mission to stop population growth in New England and a local tech entrepreneur with money to burn.

There might not seem to be a lot of similarities between the pot campaign now and the anti-40B campaign a couple years ago, but scratch the surface and some disturbing themes emerge.

With enough money, you too can put whatever way-out proposal tickles your fancy onto the state ballot.

Reefer Madness

Lewis, the chairman of Progressive, the car insurance giant, is no stranger to Massachusetts. In fact Lewis teamed up with fellow billionaire George Soros to finance a 2008 referendum that, over the objections of law enforcement officials, decriminalized possession of small amounts of marijuana.

Now, thanks to the munificence of Lewis, Massachusetts voters will get the chance to legalize a statewide network of oh-so-desperately-needed medical marijuana “dispensaries.”

Yes, it’s tough when you run out of that pot prescription and CVS won’t fill it!

And that’s not all: If the ballot question passes, with a doctor’s note, you too can carry around a 60-day supply of pot, whatever that means.

It certainly builds upon the 2008 effort – who knows, you may soon be able to haul around a whole trunk load and claim it’s just personal medical supplies.

Lewis has pumped almost all the cash – nearly $1 million – behind the effort.

Teenage Wasteland

The medical pot crusaders, who have the help of one of Boston’s top public relations firms, argue that pot smoking is just what the doctor ordered for patients with chronic conditions.

That’s despite the fact that the Massachusetts Medical Society is vigorously campaigning against the proposal – and that marijuana is available in pill form.

Law enforcement officials are also concerned, pointing to states like Colorado and California where medical marijuana has led to an explosion of pot shops selling the drug in every conceivable form, from candy to old-fashioned joints.

Too often, the pot winds up in the hands of teens, police warn, further fueling drug abuse.

“We are looking at a so-called medical marijuana (ballot initiative),” Walpole Police Chief Richard Stillman told me. “I use that term loosely because there is no such thing – it has no medical use. It’s all about smoking pot and getting high.”

Blowing Smoke Over Motives

At first glance, the proposal to legalize medical pot might not seem to have much in common with the 2010 drive to scuttle the state’s long-standing affordable housing law.

Called 40B, it gives a crucial boost to developers interested in building subsidized housing in a state where teachers, firefighters and others of modest, middle-class means can easily find themselves priced out.

Citing alleged abuses by profit hungry developers, a group disingenuously called Affordable Housing Now managed to collect the tens of thousands of signatures needed to get a 40B repeal on the ballot.

But like the backers of the medical marijuana proposal that will go before voters Nov. 6, there were other, less palatable motives driving this effort.

Almost all of the money backing the affordable housing jihad – roughly $284,000 – came from an offshoot of a wacky New Hampshire group battling to halt population growth in New England. A Chelmsford tech entrepreneur connected with the group also personally donated tens of thousands of dollars.

Last time I checked, we are not living in Bangladesh or some other desperately poor Third World country where every baby born means one more mouth to feed.

Not exactly a mainstream cause – nor one that should warrant the attention of voters across the state.

But it took a massive and costly counter campaign by the business community and housing groups to defeat this fringe proposal.

Messed-Up Process

So how do such odd and ill-considered proposals make it onto the ballot?

The answer, simply put, is that if you have lots of cash, you too can buy a ballot campaign in Massachusetts.

In fact, there is no need for you to collect a single signature – or even visit the state.

You can hire a professional firm to collect all the signatures – there are several to choose from. There are also an array of legal experts to deal with any constitutional challenges and a cottage industry of public relations firms to make your case for you.

That’s what Lewis, the Ohio billionaire is doing with his pot campaign, following the playbook that succeeded in 2008, when pot possession was made a civil offense.

It is largely the same playbook the anti-affordable housing campaign followed in 2010, hiring a professional signature firm to collect the names needed to get onto the ballot.

But one of the biggest problems with the current system is the lack of accountability.

The state’s referendum process allows wealthy individuals and groups with exotic agendas to work around the legislative process, which, while hardly perfect, might ensure, through committee hearings and the like, that some sort of vetting process takes place.

The local offshoot of the New England Coalition for Sustainable Population never had to explain exactly why it was pumping nearly $300,000 into an effort to scrap the state’s affordable housing law.

Similarly, Lewis, the car insurance chief from Ohio, is brushing off interview requests from reporters and staying silent about why he’s decided to spend $1 million on legalizing so-called medical marijuana in Massachusetts.

For someone attempting to change our state’s drug laws, a simple explanation is not too much to ask.

But when it comes to getting a question on the state ballot here in Massachusetts, apparently the only requirement is that you can write a big enough check.