(from Jennifer Lahl’s Blog) Much of my day yesterday was spent wondering how the hearings on prop. 71 were going. Not a peep heard all day. Until this morning in my inbox was this from Paul Elias, the Associated Press Biotechnology Writer. Apparently, the judge has yet to make a decision, so I am cautiously, optimistically, hopeful. But Paul Elias, wins no awards for excellent reporting in my book. He continues to parade out the same tired arguments,ad hominems and red herrings. The lawsuits which have been filed against prop. 71 have been filed because there are precendent cases in CA law surrounding issues of fiscal transparency and financial accountability, when it comes to handing out public (taxpayers) dollars. Does Elias report on that? No.

As if to discredit the lawsuits (which are not frivolous; that’s how they ended up before the Alameda County Superior Court judge) he tells you about Life Legal Defense foundation, who on behalf of the People’s Advocate and the National Tax Limitation Foundation, are defenders of human life. All human life (Elias’ drags out the anti-abortion, pro-embryo, defenders of Terri Schiavo track record of Life Legal). And as Elias tells it, that is a bad thing, defending human life. And then he complains about the other group, who has filed a lawsuit based on the conflicts of interest which has been built into the selection process.

The complaint of this lawsuit being that the Oversight Committee of Prop. 71 (who gives out the dough) are selected by the Governor and college administrators (who have much to gain by being awarded financial grants). And then, no rant would be complete with out wrapping it up with a diatribe against the social conservative president Bush. In this anti-Bush climate, anything the president stands for must be wrong.

Elias wraps it all up by pulling at your heart strings, reporting how rising interest rates are hurting the sale of the $3million worth of bonds and the fact that Klein has had to go out to wealthy donors to seek loans while litigation is holding up medical progress. And Klein trys to discredit the merits of the case by talking about the “ideological fringe” who is working against him. OMG! It’s a vast right wing conspiracy. . . .

Here is a story I would like to read about. What are the merits of these two lawsuits? How did they come to be admitted into our courts? On what precedent cases have these two lawsuits been filed? Versus a story which just attacks the people who have filed the lawsuits.

Sitting on pins and needles until the next day in court.

Author Profile

CBC-Network