Skip to main content

The Governor of California just vetoed a bill to fund the Roman Reed Spinal Cord Injury Research Act. It is a devastating blow, but we will come back, and try again.


By Don C. Reed

The Governor of California has just dealt a devastating blow to paralysis cure research.

Yesterday afternoon, driving home after a trip to Sacramento to talk to Secretary of Health Diana Dooley, who was very supportive about the research, I received a phone call on my cell. It was from Jeff Barbosa, legislative director to Assemblymember Bob Wieckowski.


I pulled off the road to take the call.

Governor Jerry Brown had vetoed our paralysis cure research funding bill,  AB 1657 (Wieckowski, D-Fremont) which would have added one dollar to every traffic ticket in California. That money would have funded the Roman Reed Spinal Cord Injury Research program. Based on last year’s traffic tickets, it could have meant $3 million dollars a year.

A year of effort.  Dozens of trips to Sacramento.  Thousands of hours of writing, editorializing, and asking favors of support from everybody we knew or could contact.

But the Governor vetoed the bill.

Who are the winners from such a decision?  It is hard to believe anyone could be happy about the destruction of a medical research program.  

But there is an anti-science wing of the Republican party. They oppose advanced stem cell research on ideological grounds.  While the vast majority of our research had nothing to do with stem cells at all, four projects (of 129) in “Roman’s law” did use some of the Bush-approved embryonic stem cell lines.  

Anti-research Republicans like Tony Strickland (R-CA) had an unearned victory dropped in his lap. Strickland had vocally opposed our bill, just as he has always tried to block stem cell research. He voted against the first bill in the nation to legalize stem cell research(SB 253, by Deborah Ortiz) which passed in California.  

Tony Strickland, by the way, is up for re-election, against a strong (and stem cell supporting) Democrat, Dr. Ami Bera.  If you live in their district, or just want to support someone who stands up for research, check out Ami Bera. I recommend Ami Bera strongly.

Who lost? America’s 5.6 million paralyzed citizens-- and anyone who wants to reduce the National Debt.  Being paralyzed is expensive. Since most people do not have a couple million dollars lying around for extra medical expenses, paralyzed people are often forced to seek help from government programs, which of course drives up the debt.

And the families?  All too often, they are the caregivers, exhausting themselves in the endless labor of providing for a paralyzed loved one; their backs ache from continual lifting, and there is no rest, always more chores: helping a paralytic use the restroom may take two hours.  

Why did Jerry Brown do it? He stood by his beliefs.  He does not approve of fee-based government, believing programs should be paid for by the General Fund, not traffic tickets, already so expensive a poor person may not be able to pay them at all.

I understand that position, and agree with it.  

But our program was funded by the General Fund, for $1.5 million a year.

Then, two years ago, due to the economy, our funding was removed.  

We either had to find a new way to pay for the program, or watch it die.  

We asked the legislature for a $3 add-on to traffic tickets, money for spinal research, a system used by eight other states. Our bill advanced as far as the Appropriations Committee, and then was defeated.  

This year, we tried again, reducing our “ask” from three dollars to just one ($1), the smallest increase allowed by law. (I actually requested fifty cents, but was told that was legally too little.)

We worked our way through all the relevant committees, one by one, with essentially zero Republican support. (Two Republicans sided with us, total.)Think what that means. We had to convince virtually every Democrat, one by one, to side with us.

We did it. We passed the Assembly, passed the Senate; AB 1657 was sent to the Governor--

--and he killed it.

Important: I do not hold a grudge against Jerry Brown. He has an impossible task to perform. There is not enough money in the General Fund.  That is not his fault, and it is the reason our program’s original funding was removed.  

Here is the problem.

Republicans have gamed the system.  It has become virtually impossible to raise taxes on the rich. In California, Proposition 13, (a citizen’s initiative funded by anti-tax groups), made it illegal to raise taxes without a 2/3 majority. Since virtually all Republicans sign a no-new-taxes pledge, the needed 2/3 majority is virtually impossible to achieve. This must change.

I strongly support Governor Brown’s tax increase on upper-income Californians. If programs like ours, or school budget increases, or anything at all progressive to have a chance, taxes on the wealthy must go up.

So. Is the small but powerful Roman Reed Spinal Cord Injury Research Act a thing of the past?

Not exactly.  

 Roman in his wheelchair and I on my aching old feet will be back in Sacramento,  in January, just as soon as the new session opens. Longstanding partner in battle Karen Miner and her many friends will lend their strength.

We’ll bring another bill forward, to fund spinal cord injury research for cure.  

Hopefully we can persuade Assemblymember Bob Wieckowski (D-Fremont) to once more lead the charge.

We will shamelessly harass our friends again, hundreds of caring individuals and groups who wrote letters and made phone calls on behalf of research for cure.  

We will knock on every legislator’s door, Democrat or Republican, asking their support. There was a time when Republicans supported our program overwhelmingly—let us hope those better days return, after the election.

To paraphrase another California Governor:

“We’ll be back!”

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  I understand the disappointment... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MGross, quill

    ...but I'm with the veto.  California can't fund the essential functions of government for Californians.  The idea of funding something new on behalf of suffering humanity in general doesn't make any sense to me.  And I'm with Brown about arbitrary assignment of fees for one thing to something entirely unrelated.  It's not a sensible way to fund things.

    Romney '12: Berlusconi without the sex and alcohol!

    by Rich in PA on Wed Sep 19, 2012 at 03:50:42 AM PDT

    •  The funding they wanted is pretty tiny. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Rich in PA

      That being said, funding it from ticket proceeds is really a bridge too far.  Using criminal fines for revenue generation is already kind of iffy... using it in particular to fund something almost entirely unrelated is ridiculous.

      Fines are supposed to be deterrents, not revenue generation mechanisms.  They should be free to be adjusted for minimizing violation and avoiding unintended consequences without worrying about whether you're going to crater funding for scientific research.

  •  this day hurts, and it's just started. so sorry. (0+ / 0-)

    "We either had to find a new way to pay for the program, or watch it die."

    yes. continue. please.

    * Join: OBAMA'S TRUTH TEAM * Addington's Perpwalk: TRAILHEAD of Accountability for Bush-2 Crimes.

    by greenbird on Wed Sep 19, 2012 at 03:59:54 AM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site