(Vanity) Advice on California Propositions Welcomed

Nov.2 | California freeper

[Zechariah11]

A so-called Republican mailer I received ("Continuing the Republican Revolution") recommends a "Yes" on Propsition 71, the embryonic stem cell research initiative, so I'm a bit dubious at what they recommend. Another mailer from McClintock has been misplaced. Please help.

[umgud]

I've gotten numerous republican political mailers with their recommendations on the ballot issues. Not one of mine promote a "yes" on 71.

[martin_fierro]

McClintock

Search feature

[elizabetty]

Vote NO on 66. Arnold says so.

[Rusty0604]

Positions advocated by the Ca Republican party:
1A support
59 support
60 support
60A support
61 oppose
62 oppose
63 oppose
64 support
65 oppose
66 oppose
67 oppose
68 oppose
69 support
70 oppose
71 oppose
72 oppose

[Mister Baredog]

No on 71, it's a scam, it will add $6 billion(including interest) to our hugh debt.

[sheana]

Propositions are easy.....if they are in any way going to cost you (the taxpayer) any additional money via bonds or higher taxes, just vote NO.
The stem cell prop is a $3 billion state program. Just what California needs....another state program. hah
I sincerely believe that we pay way too much in California.

[KillBill]

As far as I've heard, 66 merely prevents the "Stole a candy bar 3 times" people from being locked away for 25-life. It shouldn't effect violent criminals if the judges are competent (and if that's the issue, we shouldn't have bad law to get around it, we should replace the judges).

Definitely vote no on 62 (Cajun-style elections). It's just ridiculous.

[Mycroft Holmes]

I am a research scientist in California working sometimes in the biology arena. I am voting against 71 as it is welfare for biologists and in a bankrupt state we can't afford to throw 6 billion dollars towards dubious research because it is politically correct.

Presently nobody is prevented from working on embryonic stem cells on their own dime. None of the results from embryonic stem cells shows promise, and if they did they would require a continuing dose of immune suppression drugs to keep the tissue from being rejected. Accordingly, nobody is willing to do the work without grant money. The possibility of a big score just isn't there.

The hot action is in adult stem cells from bone marrow and fat. The upside of this research is that the resulting tissue is your genetic material and won't be rejected. People are risking their own money to research this because there is the potential of a big payoff.

Executive summary: When the potholes are fixed then we can afford to burn cash on dubious research.

regards,

[Looper]

I agree with Sheana. As a conservative, propositions are pretty easy, a few of the 16 were confusing (e.g., casinos). 71's a no-brainer. Why should our cash-strapped govt. fund stem-cell research? Vote no.

[farmfriend]

Analysis by the conservative Sacramento Union.

[sheana]

A voice of reason from someone in the field. Well said, Thanks!

[Poohbah]

Vote "F*** NO" on everything.

[Wonderama]

I think Arnold is supporting this proposition for political reasons. He wants to look middle of the road and sensitive. He is pro choice and I think he thinks this will help him with Democrats. Besides the obvious ethical questions, my big problem with this is. WE ARE BROKE!!!! One of the reasons Arnold was elected was his promise to stop government spending on things we cannot afford. This is one of them. If there is so much promise in stem cell research, why aren't drug companies falling all over themselves to find cures? The profit potential would be enormous is there was a chance that the stem cells were the answer to all these diseases.

Anyway, the bottom line on this one is we don't have the money, so we have to pass. Vote no on 71.

[Wonderama]

I think Arnold is supporting this proposition for political reasons. He wants to look middle of the road and sensitive. He is pro choice and I think he thinks this will help him with Democrats. Besides the obvious ethical questions, my big problem with this is. WE ARE BROKE!!!! One of the reasons Arnold was elected was his promise to stop government spending on things we cannot afford. This is one of them. If there is so much promise in stem cell research, why aren't drug companies falling all over themselves to find cures? The profit potential would be enormous is there was a chance that the stem cells were the answer to all these diseases.

Anyway, the bottom line on this one is we don't have the money, so we have to pass. Vote no on 71.

[Wonderama]

I think Arnold is supporting this proposition for political reasons. He wants to look middle of the road and sensitive. He is pro choice and I think he thinks this will help him with Democrats. Besides the obvious ethical questions, my big problem with this is. WE ARE BROKE!!!! One of the reasons Arnold was elected was his promise to stop government spending on things we cannot afford. This is one of them. If there is so much promise in stem cell research, why aren't drug companies falling all over themselves to find cures? The profit potential would be enormous is there was a chance that the stem cells were the answer to all these diseases.

Anyway, the bottom line on this one is we don't have the money, so we have to pass. Vote no on 71.

[FairOpinion]

I voted exactly as recommended in Post 5, before I had those recommendations. I am glad it's in line with the CA Republican party recommendations.

[fooman]

Dont forget the cord stem cells. My wife is having those done in dec....

[umgud]

Agreed

[Wonderama]

OMG!!! I am so sorry Fellow Freepers for all the triples! Yikkes, it's that evil computer gnome at it again trying to make me look bad. Sorry.