Prop. 71 spawns ethical debate

Perhaps no item on the Nov. 2 ballot is more personal than the
Stem Cell Research and Cures Initiative as the debate over funding
for stem cell research pits scientists and researchers against
political conservatives and religious groups.

Three years after President Bush’s endorsement on limited
federal funding for embryonic stem cell research, California voters
have the chance to decide the fate of stem cell research for their
state this November with Proposition 71. If passed, the measure
would allocate $3 billion to stem cell research with an emphasis on
embryonic stem cells.

Proposition 71 authorizes low-interest, tax-free state bonds
that will provide an average $295 million per year over a 10-year
period to fund stem cell research by California universities,
medical schools, hospitals and other non-profit research
institutions.

Stem cells are “unspecialized” cells that can
generate healthy, mature, new cells and tissues, which can
replicate. Embryonic stem cells are obtained from a blastocyst,
which is a very young embryo that contains about 200 to 250
cells.

“Proposition 71 would benefit UCLA research by providing
bonds that would allow researchers who are currently working on
embryonic cells of mice to transfer their work to human embryonic
stem cells,” said Jerry Zack, associate director of basic
sciences at the UCLA Aids Institute.

The bill will help stem cell research move “biotechnology
forward to a more permanent state,” he said.

Zack is also a researcher who works with hematopietic stem
cells, which are harvested from adult stem cells. He is unable to
work with embryonic stem cells because they are harder to access
due to the current federal administration’s policy.
Proposition 71 will expand the availability of embryonic stem cells
for institutional and non-profit research.

“UCLA Aids Institute enthusiastically endorses Proposition
71, which we see as an opportunity for California scientific
centers to take the lead, both nationally and internationally, in
this exciting and promising new field of research,” said
Edwin Bayrd, executive director of the Aids Institute.

While opponents of the bill agree advancing science to find
cures is important, many are more concerned about the fiscal
aspect, which they believe will deepen the state deficit.

“I understand that it’s for curing diseases, and
that is a great thing, but this (proposition) is not economically
responsible, and the Bruin Republicans almost categorically oppose
large bond measures,” said Matthew Knee, a fourth-year
political science student and chairman of the Bruin
Republicans.

The Bruin Republicans have not taken an official stance on the
bill yet, but they endorse and support the Republican Party, which
officially opposes stem cell research, he said.

The California Republican Party believes the funding priorities
of Prop. 71 are based on current funding levels and not scientific
success. The party does support cord blood and other adult stem
cell research that has had much success and produced treatments
compared to the present limited success of embryonic stem
cells.

Prop. 71 will not hinder the state’s bonding capacity
because the bill specifically states that there is a $350 million
cap on issuing bonds in any one year, which equals less than
one-half of the 1 percent of bonds presently authorized by the
state.

Currently, there is no state-level funding for stem cell
research, and the federal government only funds certain types of
research. The bill is designed to close this funding gap.

“Our hands are tied because of meager funding from the
government, which puts research in the hands of private researchers
and companies, making results from the research less available to
the public,” Zack said.

The bill specifically supports all types of stem cell research,
including adult, cord blood and embryonic stem cell research. It
gives priority to research that currently is not receiving adequate
or timely federal funding.

But funding from Proposition 71 does not distinguish between its
recipients of adult stem cell or embryonic cell research, which
causes controversy among religious and ethical
organizations,” Zack said.

But some do not support embryonic stem cell research, though
they support adult stem cell research. Sometimes, for religious
reasons, they believe the consequences outweigh the possible
economic benefits for the state.

“There is a massive moral difference between the two
(types of research). Because (the proposition) lacks this
distinction, I must assume it would be used to fund embryonic stem
cell research,” said Mike Rael, a second-year mathematics
student and student of the Catholic Student Association.

He added that he believes conducting the latter research is
murder and couldn’t justify the potential scientific
advancements.

The Catholic students’ organization has not met to discuss
the issue of Proposition 71, but as a Catholic organization, any
official stance should be in policy with the church’s
teachings, he said.

Churches throughout the state have been encouraging its members
to vote against the measure.

But proponents like Zack believe stem cell research could find
treatment for many diseases, including cancer, heart disease,
diabetes, Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s, HIV/AIDS, multiple
sclerosis, arthritis and spinal cord injuries.

The late “Superman” star Christopher Reeve, who died
earlier this month, is influencing many Californians to support
Proposition 71 through public service advertisements he recorded
about a week before his death. Reeve suffered from a spinal cord
injury, paralyzing him from the neck down.

“The proposition will allow academic researchers to work
on embryonic study, which will lay the foundation for products that
could be available to the public and pave the way for research in
California,” Zack said.

If the stem cell research yields products available to the
public, the state will receive royalties as a return of investment,
which will help pay for the proposition’s $3 million in
interest.

Proposition 71 specifically bans funding for cloning, but does
support funding for cloning projects intended exclusively for
medical research.

Proposition 71 will create the California Institute for
Regenerative Medicine to oversee the stem cell research program and
distribute grants to research organizations. The members of the
institute will include doctors, scientists, patient rights
advocates, medical ethicists and research universities.

An Independent Citizen’s Oversight Committee and advisory
groups will also be created to guarantee the proper use of bonds
and by requiring independent audits, open meetings, public hearings
and annual reports available to the public. The committee will
consist of several University of California representatives.