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