alifornia voters passed Proposition 71, which issues $3 billion in bonds (which will cost $6 billion to pay off) to fund stem cell research. Is stem cell research a good and worthy cause? Hell yes! Should we have passed this proposition? Hell no!
Here, I'll put this in simple terms even YOU can understand. Imagine you just bought a house and have a new mortgage. You also went shopping to furnish your new house and charged thousands of dollars on your credit cards. And you bought a new car, because heck, you deserve it! But now your property taxes are due and you're not sure how you're going to get the money to pay them. Then your roof starts to leak, so you need to replace it. And then you get a knock on your door. You answer it. It's your friendly neighborhood stem cell research fund raising guy, and he's asking for donations. How much money would you give him? Probably none, and you certainly would not write him a check for more money than you have in your checking account. Well, that's what California did. Where's the common sense? Use your heads Californians! Stop being sheep who jump after every good cause regardless of the price. Just because something makes you feel warm and fuzzy inside is not a reason to do it. Think a little!
I researched Proposition 71 and ran across some information labeled "get the facts". Here are some quotes from these facts. "Recent medical research has revealed that human stem cells may provide breakthrough cures for many common diseases." "They have the potential to provide cures for diabetes, cancer ..."
"MAY provide?" "POTENTIAL to provide?" It's a big fat maybe. There is no guarantee that throwing money at this research will actually cure anything. I could see being in favor of this if there was a recent scientific breakthrough proving cures were imminent. As it is, Californians are willing to pay $6 billion for something that may potentially lead to possible cures, maybe. I guess we'll cross our fingers and hope for the best.
Who came up with this $3 billion figure anyway? Was $2 billion simply not enough money? Couldn't we have started small, say $100 million, and if that went well put another proposition on the ballot next year for additional funds? California is the same state which just last year recalled it's governor and elected a movie star because of the financial troubles of the state. How can the same people who supported the recall election also vote to add billions of dollars in state debt? I don't understand it.