Democratic state Sen. Sheila Kuehl, California’s leading proponent of government-run health care, has assumed the role of consumer watchdog. Her new measure, SB 1565, targets problems with the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine.

Some may wonder if the senator should be pointing fingers, but CIRM does seem to lack accountability.

California voters implemented CIRM in 2004 through Proposition 71, which aimed to make use of funds for stem cell research that has the greatest potential for treatments and cures. Since 2004, CIRM has proved quite adept at throwing grant money around. In fact, it provides the most funding for human embryonic stem cell research in the world.

No Oversight, No Results, No Problems Here
It’s true that CIRM’s financial support, $3 billion in bond sales ($6 billion with interest), is not directly tied to California’s crumbling state budget. In light of the budget, however, and CIRM’s record of zero cures, it’s hardly the best time to boost executive salaries. Yet that is precisely what CIRM did, paying Alan Trounson, president of the institute, a whopping $490,000—up from $412,000.

Also receiving a pay raise are the CIRM executives; these positions will now pay more than $300,000—up from $270,000. But the questionable behavior goes beyond salaries. In recent months, reports point to several CIRM board members secretly lobbing for self-serving grants.

In case CIRM board members have forgotten, their mission is to serve citizens—these executives administer a state agency voted into existence and paid for by California taxpayers.

Pot-Calling-the-Kettle Politics
In a prepared statement, Sen. Kuehl said SB 1565 would “help ensure the public’s trust” in CIRM. Perhaps she should test her own health care bill – the universal, single-payer health care measure SB 840 – against this standard. What is there about government-run medicine that should inspire citizens’ trust?

Canada’s independent Fraser Institute has studied the costs and effects of the single-payer health care system in that country and has long warned Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger against Sen. Kuehl’s SB 840. Fraser research points to the fact that health care seems to cost less in Canada because public health insurance there does not cover the advanced medical treatments that are common in the United States.

Fraser’s 2007 report, “Waiting Your Turn: Hospital Waiting Lists in Canada,” found that the waiting time between referral from a general practitioner and treatment across 12 specialties and 10 provinces was more than 18 weeks last year. The Pacific Research Institute has shown that such a government health system in California would eliminate private health care, push doctors out of business and create long waiting lists for services. This could also cost taxpayers an estimated $1 billion annually.

If Sen. Kuehl is really concerned with public accountability and access, she would know that government bureaucracies are least accountable to individual citizens who need increased affordability and more choice in health care.

Less Government is the Answer
The CIRM is indeed a money pit that needs more scrutiny. But if a small state institute can resist oversight, how much more so would a big, government-run health care system?

As the record shows, government monopoly health care is practically impossible to reform – much less eliminate – whatever its level of non-performance. That is something legislators, and the governor, must keep in mind as they debate California’s health care future.