$5.5 Billion California Stem Cell Campaign Intensifies, Voting Begins in One Month

California's 21 million voters soon will be receiving mail that tells them a $5.5 billion stem cell ballot measure is "outrageous," unaffordable and will perpetuate long-standing problems with the state's stem cell research program. 

The assertions are contained in the official state voter guide. It also says the state stem cell agency, which is running out of money, has made "significant progress" in developing therapies during its 15-year life. 

Supporters say in the pamphlet that Proposition 14 will "dramatically expand access to clinical trials and new therapies, make treatments and cures more affordable for Californians, and provide patients, their families, and caregivers with financial assistance."

The ballot measure is intended to re-finance the agency, formally known as the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine (CIRM), which will begin closing its doors this winter unless the proposition is approved. CIRM's original $3 billion is nearly gone. The ballot measure that created it in 2004 provided no funding beyond the state bonds that were approved then. 

Because the money is borrowed, the actual cost to taxpayers rises. In the case of Proposition 14's $5.5 billion, the cost climbs to an estimated $7.3 billion, according to the state legislative analyst. The original $3 billion actually will cost about $4 billion, according to CIRM, and will not be paid off for many years.

The voters' guide is aimed at very briefly allowing supporters and opponents of ballot measures to make their cases. The guide has been issued by the state for many decades prior to actual voting, which begins in about a month -- not Nov. 3, which is the last day to vote either by mail or in person. 

Absentee voting has long been practiced in California. During the presidential primary election earlier this year, 72 percent of the ballots were cast by mail. The percentage is likely to be higher this fall because of Covid-19 and the intense interest in the presidential race. 

The mail-in voting pressures campaign organizations to make their cases very early and to assure that the turn-out of their supporters begins as soon as possible. Voters can expect to see more pitches for Proposition 14 in coming weeks. The opposition is not well organized and unlikely to mount a large media effort. 

In addition to the pro and con arguments, the guide includes the full text of the roughly 10,000-word measure, which is written in legalese and less than transparent. The legislative analyst's summary does a good job as far as it goes. 

However, important aspects of the measure are missing from the summary, including how CIRM's scope would be greatly expanded to include such things as funding research for "aging as a pathology" and "therapy delivery."  You can read about those here on the California Stem Cell Report.

Stem Cell Perseverance in California: CIRM Tells Its Jam-Packed Story

A page from CIRM's annual report, which says that the girl is alive today
as a result of a clinical trial at UCLA that CIRM helped to finance.

The California stem cell agency, which is facing financial extinction, this week unveiled its latest annual report, which is a paean to its work and indirectly a pitch to California voters to refinance it with $5.5 billion. 

In an item yesterday on the agency's blog, The Stem Cellar, Kevin McCormack, wrote, 

"This latest CIRM Annual Report covers 2019 through June 30, 2020. Why? Well, as you probably know we are running out of money and could be funding our last new awards by the end of this year. So, we wanted to produce as complete a picture of our achievements as we could – keeping in mind that we might not be around to produce a report next year."

State law requires the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine (CIRM), as the agency is formally known, to produce an annual report, much as publicly traded companies do. State law also forbids the use of taxpayer funds in ballot campaigns. But it does not forbid state agencies from engaging in their normal public information work. 

Dubbed "Perseverance: From Theory to Therapy," the annual report cost $34,000, according to the agency. The document makes a compelling case for adding $5.5 billion to the $3 billion voters provided in 2004 when they created CIRM. 

The multibillion dollar figures, however, do not include the projected interest costs to taxpayers, which bring the total estimated expense to something in the neighborhood of $13 billion. 

The $13 billion is also not mentioned in the annual report from CIRM, which is in keeping with the usual annual report traditions involving both public and private enterprises. They generally do not dwell on information that could be construed as less than upbeat, if at all possible. 

As expected, the report speaks highly of the agency's work, citing the 64 clinical trials in which it is involved. At the same time, a casual reader is likely left with the impression that CIRM financed the total cost of all of those trials, which is not the case. 

In another example of pushing the envelope, the document celebrates a study last fall that said that CIRM had an economic impact of more than $12 billion. CIRM characterized the report as "independent." CIRM actually paid USC, which has received $114 million from CIRM for stem cell research, another $206,000 to prepare the economic report. 

The annual report stated that the agency's efforts had a "significant impact" on the state's economy, which was estimated at $3.2 trillion annually in 2019. Twelve billion is 0.4 percent of that overall figure, something less than significant.  

CIRM's $5 million Covid-19 round is mentioned prominently at the front of the annual report in a move that CIRM hopes will resonate with voters when they are marking their ballots for or against Proposition 14, the stem cell measure. The $5 million is, again, a tiny amount when compared to the billions being spent nationally for Covid research. 

All that is not to say that CIRM has not performed significant work. It definitely has left a major mark on the stem cell field nationally and even globally. Some of the 2,000 people participating in the clinical trials have benefited. The agency has fostered collaboration on stem cell research between institutions that probably would not have occurred without a financial stimulus from CIRM. And it has created a new, speedy, grant-review model that puts research money in the hands of researchers more quickly.  

More can be said, but you can find it all in what perhaps will be the last annual report from an enterprise that is unique in California history and unique in size and scope among all the 50 states.

Read the California Stem Cell Report regularly for the latest and most in-depth coverage of the effort to save the California stem cell agency from financial extinction.