The decision last week by a California appellate court to uphold Proposition 71, which grants $3 billion for stem cell research funding, could mean additional funding in the future for the UCLA Institute for Stem Cell Biology and Medicine, or ISCBM.
Proposition 71 was passed by 59 percent of California voters in 2004, allowing for the creation of the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine, or CIRM, and the sale of $3 billion in bonds for research funding.
The case was brought to the appellate court after a lower court ruled in favor of the proposition last year. Having been defeated in both the lower and appellate courts, opponents have said they will likely appeal to the California Supreme Court.
Opponents of the proposition, such as the California Family Bioethics Council and the National Tax Limitation Foundation, challenged the constitutionality of the proposition, alleging conflicts of interest among those overseeing the CIRM. They pointed out that officials from three university systems who are applying for grant money are members of the board that oversees the CIRM.
“It’s so obvious that there are conflicts of interest between those who are responsible for distributing funding and those who receive the funds,” said Robert Tyler, an attorney for Advocates of Faith and Freedom, who helped the plaintiffs in their case.
But the court found nothing in Proposition 71 to warrant its reversal.
“Proposition 71 suffers from no constitutional or other legal infirmity,” the court ruling stated.
Those in favor of Proposition 71 see stem cell research as full of possibility to offer cures for a number of medical conditions.
“Stem cell research holds our best promise to find a cure for debilitating illnesses, like Parkinson’s disease and diabetes,” Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger said in a statement after the ruling.
Steve Peckman, associate director for administration and planning for the ISCBM, said Proposition 71 could provide additional funding for UCLA researchers.
“Researchers will be able to compete for that money in the form of grants,” he said.
According to a statement from ISCBM, seven researchers from UCLA have already received more than $4 million in grants from the CIRM.
“We’re already seeing the benefits of (Proposition) 71,” Peckman said.
UCLA law Professor Russell Korobkin said the appellate court’s decision is not at all surprising.
Korobkin said he did not believe the plaintiffs had a very strong case and were using the case to delay research.
“I don’t think anyone expected the challenges to Proposition 71 to succeed,” he said. “All their claims are in my opinion frivolous and have now been rejected by two levels of California courts.”
Jennifer Propper, marketing director for the Bruin Republicans, said she is concerned about additional state spending.
She said that stem cell research is controversial, which puts extra pressure on the CIRM to be open about spending.
“Because (stem cell research is) such a sensitive issue, they have even more responsibility to inform the public about how the money is being spent,” she said.
With reports from Bruin wire services.