X-Message-Number: 23607
Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2004 01:39:57 -0500 (EST)
From: Charles Platt <>
Subject: What happened in the Stump debate

While Alcor management appears to be formulating an official
response to events in the Arizona state legislature, we can
now read a complete transcript of the debate and try to judge
for ourselves what happened.

Using an MP3 file supplied to me by David Brandt-Erichsen
(thank you, David) I have created a 6000-word transcript of
the debate preceding the vote on Representative Stump's bill
to regulate cryonics in Arizona and Alcor in particular.

The transcript has now been placed online at:

http://www.alcor.org/Library/html/floordebate031104.html

Three separate votes are recorded in this transcript. As I
understand it, initially an amendment was proposed to Mr.
Stump's bill as a result of discussions on February 26, the
day of the Health Committee hearing. Subsequently Mr. Stump
drafted an amendment to that amendment, perhaps because there
was still some ambiguity as to whether his amended bill would
apply to entities (other than Alcor) which make use of the
Uniform Anatomical Gift Act. Lastly Mr. Stump amended his own
amendment, for reasons which I do not understand, since I
have not seen the actual text.

On March 11 initially the representatives debated and voted
on the second Stump amendment. Then, without discussion, they
voted on the original Health Committee amendment. Finally,
after considerable discussion, they voted on a recommendation
to accept the amended bill as a whole. All the votes were
voice-votes, and in each case the verdict was clearly
favorable to Mr. Stump, with very few "nay" votes audible.

Other useful things to know:

A "stakeholder meeting" is a meeting with people who may be
affected by upcoming legislation because they have a stake in
it. Alcor has complained that Representative Stump did not
notify it, initially, of such meetings. Representative Stump
has claimed that he went out of his way to include Alcor in
the legislative process.

During one of the debates a representative questioned the
credentials of a scientist who flew in to testify at the
Health Committee hearing. The representative suggested that
some people may have been "razzle-dazzled by an English
accent" and may not know the difference between a research
associate and a professor. In fact the visiting scientist,
Aubrey de Grey, does have a Ph.D. according to a bio that I
found at The Extropy Institute online.

Other small factual errors were made in statements by
representatives, but CryoNet readers should be able to see
them easily enough.

Readers of the transcript should understand that legislators
may ask questions which sound hostile (e.g. "Will your bill
put Alcor out of business?") but such questions give the
sponsor of the bill an opportunity to make a reassuring
statement in response (e.g. "No, I would never put a company
out of business"). A q-and-a session may be a lot friendlier
than it seems. This may not be clear from reading a written
transcript.

Caveats: I am merely a lay observer. I am not employed by
Alcor and do not speak on behalf of Alcor in any way. I have
participated in a small-town Arizona government, but I know
very little about Arizona state government. I made my
transcript with extreme care, but small inaccuracies may
exist. I encourage anyone to check the original MP3 file,
which is available for download from Alcor's web site.

--Charles Platt

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=23607