2008 Woodie Awards
EDITORIAL
Vote NO on 71
Date created: 10/11/04 Section: OPINION
- Page 1 of 2 next >
With California's $10 billion financial debt, one would find it irrational to even spend another dollar towards something unnecessary. Yet this November's ballot contains a proposition that will spend more than just a dollar ... $6 billion more.
It's called Proposition 71 and it allows the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine to be established to regulate and fund stem cell research. It would cost us Californians $6 billion-$3 billion in bonds and $3 billion in interest. This is one of the most expensive propositions on the ballot, and if passed will take out more money from our already in-debt hands, money that could instead can go into offsetting the ever increasing per unit costs of colleges around California.
Those who are so gung-ho about such an expenditure claim they won't be the ones to pay these billions of dollars. Instead Proposition 71 gets its funding through tax-free state bonds. It is as if they make "tax-free state bonds" sound like taxpayers are totally exempt from such costs. It alludes one to think that these bonds magically grow on trees. But in actuality, our tax dollars are the seeds that produce these trees. Our tax dollars are part of the general fund. And according to the Legislative Accounting Office, the General Fund bond debt will grow from $33 billion to over $50 billion in debt by June 30, 2005.
With all these ridiculous numbers thrown at us, we as college students find ourselves questioning why spend billions of dollars on stems cells and not on our own brain cells. $3 billion in bonds is being contributed to a cause that may save lives, but there is no solid proof.
Some may say, "Well, I hear it can cure my Uncle Joe's cancer and my granny's Alzheimer's."
So, if this stem cell research can work miracles and save the lives of those you love, then why isn't this research funded by biotech and pharmaceutical companies instead of California residents? Wouldn't these companies jump at such an opportunity? Wouldn't they want their titles to go down in history as the ones who found the cure for cancer? Wouldn't they take the risk for that name, that title, and that honor?
It's called Proposition 71 and it allows the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine to be established to regulate and fund stem cell research. It would cost us Californians $6 billion-$3 billion in bonds and $3 billion in interest. This is one of the most expensive propositions on the ballot, and if passed will take out more money from our already in-debt hands, money that could instead can go into offsetting the ever increasing per unit costs of colleges around California.
Those who are so gung-ho about such an expenditure claim they won't be the ones to pay these billions of dollars. Instead Proposition 71 gets its funding through tax-free state bonds. It is as if they make "tax-free state bonds" sound like taxpayers are totally exempt from such costs. It alludes one to think that these bonds magically grow on trees. But in actuality, our tax dollars are the seeds that produce these trees. Our tax dollars are part of the general fund. And according to the Legislative Accounting Office, the General Fund bond debt will grow from $33 billion to over $50 billion in debt by June 30, 2005.
With all these ridiculous numbers thrown at us, we as college students find ourselves questioning why spend billions of dollars on stems cells and not on our own brain cells. $3 billion in bonds is being contributed to a cause that may save lives, but there is no solid proof.
Some may say, "Well, I hear it can cure my Uncle Joe's cancer and my granny's Alzheimer's."
So, if this stem cell research can work miracles and save the lives of those you love, then why isn't this research funded by biotech and pharmaceutical companies instead of California residents? Wouldn't these companies jump at such an opportunity? Wouldn't they want their titles to go down in history as the ones who found the cure for cancer? Wouldn't they take the risk for that name, that title, and that honor?
