Charles Halpern's open letter on bond sales and conflict of interest to the CIRM Finance Committee
By Charles Halpern
| 05. 05. 2005
To Members of the California Stem Cell Research and Cures Finance Committee
Dear Chairman Angelides and Committee members:
The California Stem Cell Research and Cures Finance Committee ("the Committee") plays a critical role in the structure of Proposition 71. It is charged by Section 125291(a) to "determine whether or not it is necessary or desirable to issue bonds authorized pursuant to this article…and, if so, the amount of bonds to be issued and sold." In other words, the Committee has gatekeeper responsibility -- deciding when and if bonds will be issued, and in what amounts, based on its determination regarding necessity and desirability.
The "necessary or desirable" determination is particularly important in this instance because the Treasurer, the Controller, and the Finance Director are the only officials answerable to the electorate who have a role in overseeing the expenditure of public funds by the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine (CIRM). The voters who supported Proposition 71 expect that no bonds will be issued until the Committee has concluded that it is necessary and desirable to do so, after giving careful...
Related Articles
By Emma McDonald Kennedy
| 09.25.2025
In the leadup to the 2024 election, Donald Trump repeatedly promised to make IVF more accessible. He made the commitment central to his campaign, even referring to himself as the “father of IVF.” In his first month in office, Trump issued an executive order promising to expand IVF access. The order set a 90-day deadline for policy recommendations for “lowering costs and reducing barriers to IVF,” although it didn’t make any substantive reproductive healthcare policy changes.
The response to the...
By Jacob Bogage, The Washington Post | 09.03.2025
The conservative group behind the Project 2025 governing playbook for President Donald Trump’s second term is set to propose sweeping revisions to U.S. economic policy meant to encourage married heterosexual couples to have more children.
The Heritage Foundation, a right-wing...
By Caroline Kitchener, The New York Times | 08.21.2025
Less than two weeks after an Alabama Supreme Court decision upended in vitro fertilization in the state and prompted a national backlash, over 100 conservative congressional staff members and I.V.F. skeptics crammed into a meeting room a few blocks from...
By Carter Sherman, The Guardian | 08.23.2025
For Erica L and her husband, in-vitro fertilization was the “nuclear option”.
After two years of trying to conceive, Erica and her husband had no idea why they could not have a baby. Doctors said only that they had “unexplained...
