Corzine deaf to stem cell defeat
One day after voters rejected a proposal to borrow $450 million over 10 years for stem cell research, Gov. Corzine, Senate President Richard Codey and Assembly Speaker Joseph Roberts Jr. all said they would proceed with plans to borrow $270 million to build stem cell research facilities throughout the state. What part of "No" don't they understand.
It's outrageous they plan to move forward with their plans in the face of clear taxpayer opposition to increasing state debt to fund research that should be funded with private money. What's the point of building new facilities if there is no money available for research?
Soon after it was clear that voters had rejected the stem cell question, and the question seeking permanent dedication of 1 cent of the sales tax to property tax relief, Corzine said voters had sent "clear instructions" to Trenton. "They told us to resolve our alarming and pressing financial problems."
That's right. Don't build buildings for research that voters have refused to fund.
Voters rejected the stem cell public question for various reasons. Some may have done so for religious reasons. But I think most people voted against it because the state refused to answer two questions: If stem cell research is so promising, why aren't drug companies investing their own money in it? And how can the state justify borrowing more money when it is knee-deep in debt and facing a $3 billion budget deficit next year, and strapped taxpayers are constantly reminded by Corzine that billions more will be needed for school funding, new school construction, transportation infrastructure, affordable housing and health coverage for the uninsured?
For the first time in 16 years, voters rejected a public question. That should tell Corzine et al something about the mood of the voters. He says he understands. Apparently he doesn't.
It's outrageous they plan to move forward with their plans in the face of clear taxpayer opposition to increasing state debt to fund research that should be funded with private money. What's the point of building new facilities if there is no money available for research?
Soon after it was clear that voters had rejected the stem cell question, and the question seeking permanent dedication of 1 cent of the sales tax to property tax relief, Corzine said voters had sent "clear instructions" to Trenton. "They told us to resolve our alarming and pressing financial problems."
That's right. Don't build buildings for research that voters have refused to fund.
Voters rejected the stem cell public question for various reasons. Some may have done so for religious reasons. But I think most people voted against it because the state refused to answer two questions: If stem cell research is so promising, why aren't drug companies investing their own money in it? And how can the state justify borrowing more money when it is knee-deep in debt and facing a $3 billion budget deficit next year, and strapped taxpayers are constantly reminded by Corzine that billions more will be needed for school funding, new school construction, transportation infrastructure, affordable housing and health coverage for the uninsured?
For the first time in 16 years, voters rejected a public question. That should tell Corzine et al something about the mood of the voters. He says he understands. Apparently he doesn't.
posted by Randy Bergmann at 11:08 AM
4 Comments:
It could be Corzine's brain is rapidly deteriorating. I recommend we strap him up with a car seat belt, and apply a massive dose of adult stem cells to his medulla oblongata.
RB: "If stem cell research is so promising, why aren't drug companies investing their own money in it?"
There's a dirty little secret about the drug companies: They don't do much research at all. Many of the new drugs come from the work of universities, small biotech firms and the NIH. Astonishingly little innovation comes from the drug companies who, for the most part, sit back and wait for the chance to purchase the monopoly rights for new drugs from those who actually do the research and then spend their money on marketing and lobbying. Their marketing spending dwarfs their R&D. What little research they do usually relates to "me too" drugs, which are variants of already-existing drugs, sometimes only differing by a molecule or two. Then they patent it and hype it up.
A very nice article on this can be found at: The Truth About the Drug Comapnies
So in fact, the drug companies can't be counted on to invest money in stem cell research as they're not about innovation. They'll just sit back and wait for others to do it and then buy the monopoly rights
So what if universities do the work.With all the taxes we pay and all the tuition they charge they should be doing something useful.
After all it's "for the children" anyway.
The point was that the drug companies don't do much research for themselves so we shouldn't be using their lack of interest in stem cell research to gauge the promise of it.
Post a Comment
<< Home