The article was written by Jon Coupal, president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association in Sacramento, and state Sen. John Moorlach, R-Costa Mesa.
They described the agency's efforts as "dismal" and declared that "this disappointing abuse of taxpayer dollars" should be terminated.
The print version of the article appeared in Sunday's paper, which has a circulation of about 312,000. Both the print and online version carried photographs involving stem cell research. But neither was from UC Irvine, which has received $108 million from the agency and has a member on the board of the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine (CIRM), as the agency is formally known. UC Irvine is located only 17 minutes away from the offices of the newspaper.
The piece is a relatively tame preview of the rhetoric that will confront CIRM if it goes to the ballot in 2020 for more billions from California taxpayers. The article cited arguments from the 2004 Prop. 71 ballot measure campaign that created the agency.
Coupal and Moorlach said,
"According to the ballot pamphlet mailed to voters, proponents promised the bond proceeds would advance the 'cure and treatment' of 'cancer, diabetes, heart disease, Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s, spinal cord injuries, blindness, Lou Gehrig’s disease, HIV/AIDS, mental health disorders, multiple sclerosis, Huntington’s disease, and more than 70 other diseases and injuries.'
"But actual outcomes for these promised advances are speculative at best and nonexistent at worst. Similar benefits were promised to the California economy to 'generate millions of new tax dollars.'
"With such a dismal record, this would be a good time to shut the spigot on issuing the remaining $345 million — meaning some $690 million would be saved by state taxpayers. That money could be better spent on pensions, schools, roads, housing or better basic medical care for our residents."As for the high school project business, the article said CIRM "continues to operate as a kind of advanced high-school science project, instead of moving toward the cures promised to voters in Prop. 71."
No comments:
Post a Comment