CGS-authored
A committee convened by the US Institute of Medicine (IOM) heard testimony on 10 April about shortcomings of the San Francisco-based California Institute for Regenerative Medicine (CIRM). And although members of the IOM committee asked probing questions about CIRM’s structure and performance, looming over the review is the reality that it’s difficult to make substantial revisions to some oft-criticized aspects of the agency, because the proposition that created CIRM makes it very difficult to change them.
That in itself is an important lesson, Stuart Drown of California’s Little Hoover Commission, a state oversight agency, told the IOM panel. “The most important takeaway is to really be careful what you lock yourself into in a proposition that carries the weight of constitutional law,” Drown said. He explained that in 2004, when voters approved the proposition that created CIRM, embryonic stem-cell research was under fire on the national stage, and that the proposition appeared to have been drafted to make the agency “bullet-proof” against detractors of stem-cell research.
Although it did achieve that goal, some provisions in the proposition have impeded the...
That in itself is an important lesson, Stuart Drown of California’s Little Hoover Commission, a state oversight agency, told the IOM panel. “The most important takeaway is to really be careful what you lock yourself into in a proposition that carries the weight of constitutional law,” Drown said. He explained that in 2004, when voters approved the proposition that created CIRM, embryonic stem-cell research was under fire on the national stage, and that the proposition appeared to have been drafted to make the agency “bullet-proof” against detractors of stem-cell research.
Although it did achieve that goal, some provisions in the proposition have impeded the...