wnyc.org / 93.9fm / am 820

Comments

• [1] irina from New York November 07, 2007 - 12:06PM

  I live in NYC.

  Yes, I would definitely be willing to pay taxes toward stem cell research. My daughter had a spinal cord injury and she is the lucky one who has a lot of troubles with her walking but she can walk. I saw to many young kids whose hope to walk and to regain the important functions of their bodies is only the stem cell researches.

  
  
• [2] Martin from Central NJ November 07, 2007 - 12:18PM

  I voted for the stem cell funding. I believe that stem cells hold breakthroughs that we cannot find through other research.

  
  
• [3] Chuck Newman from NJ November 07, 2007 - 12:19PM

  I voted against it in support of the vote-no-on-all-ballet-measures campaign. Too frequently NJ approves measures and much of that money is spent inefficiently.

  Otherwise, I support stem cell research and I am glad states are taking the initiative to fund it themselves.

  
  
• [4] Steve from Northern NJ November 07, 2007 - 12:20PM

  I live in NJ and voted for the stem cell referendum. I think its defeat was not a vote against stem cell research but a vote against more borrowing while our state's financial condition is in such a difficult state.

  At another time, with less focus on $$, I believe this referendum would have passed.

  
  
• [5] Chris from Newark, NJ November 07, 2007 - 12:23PM

  I am totally in favor all stem cell research efforts however, being a resident of NJ, my preference is to avoid sanctioning more bond issues that will surely be mismanaged and plundered by our so-called legislators. Private industry, who will reap great profits at the end of the day, needs to lead the way together with private foundations to which I donate.

  
  
• [6] Phyllis from NJ November 07, 2007 - 12:24PM

  Despite 100% in favor I voted against stem cell because NJ is broke. Too much money would be wasted in setting it up when others are already doing so. NJ has to become fiscally responsible.

  
  
• [7] John Celardo from Fanwood, NJ November 07, 2007 - 12:26PM

  I too voted for the stem cell question. I’m disappointed that the issue lost, but not surprised. The turnout was low, but the big, bad machine has convinced enough people that using embryos for research is tantamount to abortion. There’s so much potential that’s being thwarted by the religious right. OUI!!!

  
  
• [8] eric fluger from jersey city November 07, 2007 - 12:28PM

  i was ambivilent about the nj bill. i voted for it but was holding my nose.

  i'm all in favor embrionic stem cell research, but really think the federal government should be funding it and in the absence of federal funding, a regional approach would be preferable to individual states going it alone.

  unfortunaely, tho federal or regional funding options were not before me. the state funding options was, so i voted for it.

  however, i can undersatnd why others dissagreed. the state of nj is in financial crisis right now and many nj voters may not see this research as a top priority for the state government even if they do appreciate what it is and why it's worthwhile.

  
  
• [9] hjs from 11211 November 07, 2007 - 12:28PM

  too bad we weren't talking about this last week.

  shame on NJ voters (the 23% that showed up)

  for failing to invest in the future. failing to avoid the superstition. and for thinking a blob or unused cells are more important than the million that will be effected by these illnesses.

  
  
• [10] G. Eagle from Jersey City, NJ November 07, 2007 - 12:29PM

  with regard to the failure to pass the stem cell bond issue, I voted for it, and I think there was a successful effort by opponents that linked the stem cell bill with higher property taxes (I heard some people making this linkage). So it's (I hope) more a statement of how bad the property tax situation is in NJ rather than opposition to stem cell research. Or maybe people are just ignorant...

  
  
• [11] farideh farhadi from Fort lee, nj November 07, 2007 - 12:33PM

  I'm in favor of stem cell research but voted no on funding because neither democrats nor republicans are addressing the root causes of nj"s fiscal problems. We don't need any more bond issues until we set the financila house in order. By the way, surgery was regarded as an abomination when it was first practiced. We were not supposed to cut into the human body because it was sacrosanct. Maybe we should spend more time educating people.

  
  
• [12] Lora Muckin from North Brunswick, NJ November 07, 2007 - 12:40PM

  I voted for the bond supporting embryonic stem cell research projects. NJ seems to be a great place for this research, given the many pharma companies located here, along with the medical school. These projects could also produce a number of high paying jobs. However, given the State's fiscal condition and the lack of any leadership in correcting it, I am not surprised it was voted down. Perhaps when the Democrats have some real control in Washington, the Federal government will assume its rightful place in spearheading this vital research.

  
  
• [13] Tom Klimuc from Westfield, NJ November 07, 2007 - 12:40PM

  I voted against the $450M stem cell research bond for two reasons, first NJ is way overspending, sinking in debt, and needs to demonstrate fiscal responsibility, second NJ and this area is the heart of the pharma industry, if stem cell research is so hot why is it not being jumped on in a big way by the big and small pharma companies.

  
  
• [14] Thomas H Shaw Jr. from Wayne, NJ November 07, 2007 - 02:39PM

  I voted no to the stem cell bond. Our state has become the poster child for every boondoggle and money disappears in ways that would titillate fiction writers. You know New Jersey, the "Tollbooth State".

  If stem cell research is going to transform lives as reported, wealthy individual investors would be flocking to get onboard. Perhaps they will once the rest of us come to our fiscal senses and say no.

  Excellent segment though!

  
  
• [15] Amy De Rosa from New York City November 07, 2007 - 03:56PM

  I am not a NJ resident, but I would not be willing to pay taxes toward embryonic stem cell research, though I would be willing to pay taxes toward adult stem cell research, which has in fact proved to be a more productive line of research for the treatment of many of the targeted diseases.

  
  
• [16] max from New York November 07, 2007 - 08:29PM

  While the effort is certainly noble, I'm not sure of the wisdom of several states attacking the same problem simply because of the dolt in the White House. California has committed a large sum for research as well (although I understand there have been problems getting this off the ground.)

  Hopefully, the next election will allow a federally funded program that will not duplicate effort and waste time and money.

  In response to Ms. De Rosa's comment about "adult" stem cells (she means "autologous")they are not "more productive" (sic) than embryonic stem cell lines. That's pro-life twaddle. And in response to Mr. Shaw's complaint, private equity has indeed come forward to fund research with substantial sums.