Thanks for the timely warning

I just have one question regarding this article about the cancer research bill that passed the Lege and will appear as a referendum on the November ballot.

The rhetoric was befitting a $3 billion assault on the nation's No. 1 killer of people under 85.

State Rep. Ellen Cohen, D-Houston, called it "an answer to our prayers." Colleague Senfronia Thompson, also D-Houston, said she'd "like to sit back and tell my grandchildren I had something to do with the cure."

And seven-time Tour de France winner Lance Armstrong told Texas legislators that "if we get this done, I can honestly say that it'll be the greatest thing I've ever done with my work within cancer, which makes it one of the greatest things I've done in my life."

Thanks to such support, the bill to establish a cancer research center in Texas sailed through the Legislature in May and was signed by Gov. Rick Perry in June. All that remains is for Texas voters in November to approve the center's funding, a constitutional amendment allowing the state to issue up to $300 million a year in bonds over the next decade.

There's just one problem: A lot of health care experts think the initiative is a bad idea.

"The issue is whether it makes sense for a state to front the money for research whose benefits presumably will be spread around the nation," said Seth Chandler, a law professor with the University of Houston's Health Law and Policy Institute. "It's nice and altruistic, but is it sound fiscal policy? I'm skeptical."

Wouldn't it have made more sense to write this article while the Lege was in session and debating the bill in question? I mean, this is good to know and all, and perhaps it should be brought up again later, when people are thinking about voting in November, but what good is it to discuss now? I'm just asking.

Posted by Charles Kuffner on July 30, 2007 to That's our Lege