Will race to replace Pelosi doom Wiener’s $23 billion bond proposal?

The race to replace Rep. Nancy Pelosi in Congress, once the nation’s most powerful political woman, has scrambled the future of a proposal to create a $23 billion California version of the National Institutes of Health.

However, the situation may augur well for the $12 billion California Institute for Regenerative Medicine (CIRM), whose fate will also be tied to the Golden State’s ballot box a few years down the road.

Altogether, the situation provides additional evidence that politics, taxpayer dollars and political maneuvering are inextricably linked to the funding of scientific research in this country, regardless of the wishes of scientists.

The matter involves state Sen. Scott Wiener, a 55-year-old San Francisco Democrat who had hoped that Pelosi, 85, would announce her retirement earlier than she did today, declaring her city was “heaven on earth.”

On Oct. 22, Wiener announced he was running. Weiner’s early decision was driven by the political pressures to enter the race sooner rather than later.

Just 13 days prior to Wiener’s entry, Saikat Chakrabarti, a 39-year-old tech industry multimillionaire and former chief of staff to New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NewYork), kicked off his own campaign at a well-attended rally in Pelosi’s San Francisco district.

Politically, Wiener could not allow competition to move in and scoop up political and financial support while he stood on the sidelines. Wiener’s decision to run next year carries implications for all the legislation he is carrying in Sacramento, adding a new calculus about its value.

Running for Pelosi’s seat will require all Wiener’s formidable political skills. He will be intensely focused on the primary race, to put it mildly.

An electoral campaign is like a war with a deadline. It requires total commitment from a candidate. And Wiener’s legislative emphasis will center on what is most likely to win that war and enhance his voter appeal.

A $23 billion plan to fund scientists may not be the most appealing.  Pocketbook issues dominate the current concerns of California voters, according to recent polling – not the lack of scientific research funding.

At the same time, Wiener’s political enemies and his opponents’ political friends will be looking for ways to weaken his candidacy. Wiener’s $23 billion proposal (SB607) already seems well down on his priority list. He has made little effort to promote it in the media. It was introduced in the waning hours of this year’s legislative session and needs substantial work to fill in significant details.

Pushing the proposed ballot measure through the legislature will require a two-thirds vote of both houses, a prodigious task. It is likely to be heavily lobbied because of its large scope, which makes it more difficult to satisfy the many interested parties. Peeling off only a few Democrats could doom the proposal.

Even before Wiener jumped into the race, his proposal had hit some Capitol bumps. Last month, Sam Chung, senior vice president of the California Life Sciences Association, told a Capitol Weekly conference on health care that next fall’s ballot is likely to contain several huge bond measures that would stretch the generosity of voters. “Mutually assured destruction” could be the result, he said, when the competing measures collide.

If voters choose to back Wiener’s $23 billion proposal, it would appear to make CIRM redundant. However, in less than five years, CIRM will need more billions to keep its doors open. And its only source of cash is borrowing by the state (bonds), which Wiener also seeks to use for his research proposal.

CIRM’s current pitch to voters is weak. After 21 years, it has yet to fulfill voter expectations from 2004 that it would develop revolutionary therapies that are available to the general public for afflictions ranging from spinal paralysis to cancer and diabetes.

CIRM narrowly survived a near-death experience in 2020, as it was preparing to close its doors. But voters saved it, approving a $5.5 billion ballot measure on a 51-49 percent vote.

Could CIRM survive again? Would voters be ready to fund CIRM with more billions when the state already has a shiny, new “California Foundation for Science and Health Research,” courtesy of Scott Wiener? It is impossible to predict.

Like virtually all of the scientific community, CIRM is appalled by the current research funding crisis. Nonetheless, the agency is likely to be quietly pleased if Wiener’s legislation is quietly submerged in the State Capitol.

David Jensen is a retired newsman and has covered CIRM for nearly 21 years on his newsletter, the California Stem Cell Report. He authored the book, “California’s Great Stem Cell Experiment,“ in 2020.