Stem cell chief's exit is long overdue
By Editorial,
Sacramento Bee
| 06. 20. 2009
Palo Alto developer Robert Klein II led the ballot campaign in 2004 to create California's stem cell research institute. He wrote the initiative, ensuring that only he would chair the institute's oversight board, which is charged with handling $3 billion in public money.
For more than four years, this page has detailed how Klein's all-powerful control has not been in the best interest of either taxpayers or the stem cell agency, the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine.
Now it appears that Klein will step down from CIRM at the end of 2010 – more than 18 months away.
Klein is an impassioned, tenacious advocate for stem cell research, but he is precisely the wrong person to head a government science agency. Chairing a 29-member board that is far too large and rife with conflicts of interest, Klein has operated the institute in a smothering manner, with little regard to transparency or lines of authority.
Since 2005, Klein has run off talented scientists, such as former CIRM President Zach Hall. He has helped direct millions of dollars to contracts for law...
Related Articles
By Katherine Long, Ben Foldy, and Lingling Wei, The Wall Street Journal | 12.13.2025
Inside a closed Los Angeles courtroom, something wasn’t right.
Clerks working for family court Judge Amy Pellman were reviewing routine surrogacy petitions when they spotted an unusual pattern: the same name, again and again.
A Chinese billionaire was seeking parental...
By David Jensen, The California Stem Cell Report | 12.11.2025
California’s stem cell and gene therapy agency today approved spending $207 million more on training and education, sidestepping the possibility of using the cash to directly support revolutionary research that has been slashed and endangered by the Trump administration.
Directors...
By Sarah Kliff, The New York Times | 12.10.2025
Micah Nerio had known since his early 30s that he wanted to be a father, even if he did not have a partner. He spent a decade saving up to pursue surrogacy, an expensive process where he would create embryos...
Several recent Biopolitical Times posts (1, 2, 3, 4) have called attention to the alarmingly rapid commercialization of “designer baby” technologies: polygenic embryo screening (especially its use to purportedly screen for traits like intelligence), in vitro gametogenesis (lab-made eggs and sperm), and heritable genome editing (also termed embryo editing or reproductive gene editing). Those three, together with artificial wombs, have been dubbed the “Gattaca stack” by Brian Armstrong, CEO of the cryptocurrency company...
