Moorlach Fights for Another Principle

In one brilliant doomsayer’s moment 10 years ago, John Moorlach built up enough credibility to last a professional lifetime. As the lone and much-criticized voice warning that Orange County’s highly touted investment portfolio risked financial meltdown -- months before the county would declare the largest municipal bankruptcy in U.S. history -- Moorlach secured his place in local history.

His license plate reads “SKYFELL.”

He rode the wave into the county treasurer’s job, which he’s held since 1995. But in this election season, Moorlach is putting some of that popularity on the line by publicly opposing Proposition 71, the $3-billion bond measure to finance stem-cell research in California. He’s one of three co-signers of the argument against Proposition 71, on the November ballot. He notes that the argument begins by saying its signers support stem-cell research but not as outlined in the proposition.

The issue is rife with philosophical, religious, medical and emotional overtones, but Moorlach says that isn’t what drew him in. Even as a born-again Christian who says he’d oppose anything verging on the taking of human life -- as many embryonic-stem-cell opponents describe the research -- Moorlach insists his opposition isn’t framed by his beliefs.

Except, that is, his belief that taxpayers shouldn’t be in the business of underwriting medical research.

In detailing his displeasure with Prop. 71, Moorlach draws from his bag full of bankruptcy credibility. He doesn’t oppose every bond issue but says this one creates a process that lacks accountability and oversight -- a situation he says is ominously reminiscent of Orange County finances, circa 1994. On top of that, he says, the measure would enrich pharmaceutical companies, whether they hit medical pay dirt with their research or a dead end.

Proposition 71 supporters probably would dispute that, but even if Moorlach thought the measure overflowed with accountability and oversight, he’d still dislike it.

“You’re adding on [borrowing] at a time when we’re probably at our highest level of debt, and you’re doing something that’s highly unique,” he says. “We’re saying to government, ‘We’d like you to be a venture capital firm. We’d like you to speculate and figure out if you can come up with research and retail it or at least get royalties and residuals [from research] so you can pay the debt.”

Proposition 71 backers say it fills a crucial void left by politicians. That’s better left to private enterprise, Moorlach says. “If it’s profitable, if there’s a result that’s going to do great things, that’s marketable and that’s going to make somebody rich, then why should we [the state] enter that?”

Although he was more than willing to sign on to the Prop. 71 opposition, Moorlach hasn’t volunteered nor been asked to campaign against it. He says more than once in our conversation that he isn’t an expert on stem-cell research. Nor does he seem eager to get into a moral or philosophical debate over it.

The only time he flares is when asked if he’d worry about being seen as a roadblock to important medical research.

“I’m ashamed these [pro-71] guys are pulling this stunt,” he says. “I think it is a stunt. What it is is a corporate subsidy on the backs of taxpayers and, doggone it, if this is the right way to go, then raise your own capital, let your investors win or lose on their investments, just like the rest of us.”

He concedes that the debate may focus on people who suffer from debilitating diseases. “Do I cower from a good debate, just because I might be outnumbered or out-emotionalized? Agree or disagree, I’m more than happy to take a position and stick to it, even if I’m the only one holding it.”

*

Dana Parsons’ column appears Wednesdays, Fridays and Sundays. He can be reached at (714) 966-7821 or at dana.parsons@latimes.com. An archive of his recent columns is at www.latimes.com/parsons.