Criticism of California Stem Cell Initiative Growing.

As California officials begin the process of spending billions of dollars on embryonic stem cell research and cloning approved by voters in November, the reality of the financial and ethical aspects of the initiative are causing growing concern.

"The initiative created a state constitutional right to human cloning and pays for this highly speculative and morally controversial research by borrowing $6 billion, including interest," Wesley J. Smith, author of Consumer's Guide to a Brave New World, told NRL News. "This at a time when California is broke, hospital emergency rooms are closing, and services to seniors and the developmentally disabled are being cut."

A new oversight panel and the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine will evaluate proposals to use embryos in medical research and distribute about $300 million a year for 10 years, according to the New York Times. "It's this century's gold rush," Lt. Gov. Cruz Bustamante said at a November 16 ceremony appointing members of the panel, the Times reported.

Even some supporters of the research are questioning whether the policies and procedures of distributing the funds, which are still being formulated, will be sufficient to protect the taxpayers' interest. "We have committed an elaborate public mechanism to this research," Miriam Piven Cotler, a medical ethicist at California State University, Northridge, told the Times. "Who safeguards it? What interests will be represented, how public will their deliberations be, and how much power will they have?"

The view of potential embryonic stem cell therapy as the next great money-making gold mine for investors, and California as the state that will now attract the biotech industry dollars, rests more on theory than any proven results.

"This is a huge grant from the people of California to a very specific biotech business, and it's only because of stem cells' notoriety that it's this and not something else," syndicated columnist Charles Krauthammer told the Times. "If taxpayers were to spend $3 billion, the logical thing would be to devote the money to the most promising areas of research, but that was never discussed because of the sexiness of stem cells."

Smith agreed: "Why should cloning and embryonic stem cell ...