Suit Filed to Invalidate Calif's $3 Billion Stem Cell Institute

By Paul Elias The Associated Press

Published: Feb 22, 2005 SAN FRANCISCO (AP) - A politically conservative public interest group filed a lawsuit Tuesday seeking to invalidate the $3 billion stem cell research funding institution California voters approved in November.

The lawsuit alleges that provisions in Proposition 71 exempting members of the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine from some government conflict-of-interest laws are illegal.

The suit also alleges that the ballot language violated a California election law that requires each proposition to address a single subject. Proposition 71 was supported by 59 percent of voters.

The lawsuit was filed by a newly created nonprofit called Californians for Public Accountability and Ethical Science, which is supported by at least one person who originally opposed Proposition 71.

David Llewellyn, the Sacramento attorney representing the plaintiffs, would identify only two of the people behind the new nonprofit: Dr. Vincent Fortanasce, who was president of the "No on 71" campaign, and Joni Eareckson Tada, a paraplegic who founded Joni and Friends Ministries in Agoura Hills.

"People need to get the message that this proposition is an enormous expenditure of money in a financially strapped state for human embryo research that is increasingly seen as problematic and hypothetical," Tada said in a statement.

Institute spokeswoman Julie Buckner said the proposition's passage demonstrated that a majority of voters "felt comfortable that there was ample oversight and accountability built into the initiative."

The lawsuit was filed directly with the California Supreme Court, a rarely used - and rarely successful - legal gambit.

Llewellyn said he and his clients bypassed the lower courts because of the issue's urgency: The institute will soon begin to dole out the $3 billion in borrowed money over the next 10 years. Institute officials said they hope to award the first grants by May.

The institute is governed by the Independent Citizen's Oversight Committee, which has 29 members who were appointed by various elected officials, including five by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger. The 29 members are in charge of awarding the institute's research grants, loans and contracts.

The proposition's language exempts the members from some of California's conflict laws.

It allows members to vote on awarding research grants that directly address diseases they or their family members may have. At least three members have debilitating illnesses such as Parkinson's disease and multiple sclerosis. Institute interim president and chairman Robert Klein's son suffers from diabetes and Klein's mother has Alzheimer's disease.

Ten of the committee's members represent specific disease advocacy groups, and the lawsuit alleges these appointments will improperly lead to an inordinate amount of research funding addressing those ailments to the detriment of other diseases not represented on the board.

The plaintiffs also contend the conflict exemptions will allow committee scientists to receive institute grants.

That issue will be addressed directly at the institute's committee meeting March 1 at Stanford University. At the last committee meeting in San Diego there appeared to be a consensus building to ban members from applying for institute research grants.

The proposition's language exempts the members from some of California's conflict laws.

How convenient for them.

3 posted on 02/22/2005 6:20:03 PM PST by NormsRevenge (Semper Fi ...... The War on Terrorism is the ultimate 'faith-based' initiative.)

If those are his reasons for suing then Tada is an idoit. The voters voted for it, so whether Tada thinks it is a waste is hardly an issue or ground to overturn.

This tactic is a waste and will get this two man crew slapped down from the SC.

yea, whats that about....don't even remember hearing about that during the election - do you?

This suit will get squashed like a bug on the hydrogen highway.

Emotion got this sucker passed and a lot of folks who should know better suckered up for it big-time.

But, hey , after the Recall .. no one should have any questions about the ability of voters to discern fact from fiction or lobbyists agendas that are anything but noble or in the best interests of the state and its taxpayers.

6 posted on 02/22/2005 6:27:32 PM PST by NormsRevenge (Semper Fi ...... The War on Terrorism is the ultimate 'faith-based' initiative.)

I don't know enough. The one issue argument strikes me as weak. The conflict of interest argument would have to be something in the California Constitution. But the California SCOTUS will not like the bypassing of the lower courts. It really isn't that big of an emergency. It's only money.

As you know, I favor stem cell research, but this is just about the dumbest initiative I have ever had the displeasure of laying my little beady eyes on.

The Leftists in Kalifornicate have already established the precedent of using the courts to overrule the result of an election.....They've done it a NUMBER OF TIMES.

Why should THEY be the only ones to use this tactic?

Isn't turnabout "fair play"???

9 posted on 02/22/2005 7:15:02 PM PST by river rat (You may turn the other cheek, but I prefer to look into my enemy's vacant dead eyes.)

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.