| OCR Text |
Show Hinckley Journal of Politics 2006 2003). Buddhism has not issued a statement on the issue (Keown, 2004). The Christian Coalition strongly opposes embryonic stem cell research, and instead favors adult stem cell research, which does not involve the destruction of embryos. They do little to mask their feelings on the issue, referring to it as "human-embryo-stem-cell-destruction research." They also make it clear that they do not support candidates who are in favor of embryonic stem cell research. They encourage people to call the U.S. Capitol switch board, and remind their senators that "any vote for the destruction of human embryos in the House and Senate will be scored in the Christian Coalition's 2005 Congressional Scorecards and 2006 and 2008 Voter guides as a pro-abortion vote" (Christian Coalition of America, 2005). Current Legislation The stem cell debate and the use of federal funds regained national attention on February 15, 2005, when Representative Michael Castle (D-), along with 200 co-sponsors, introduced House Resolution 810. This resolution, titled the Stem Cell Enhancement Act of 2005 contained the following provisions: "Amends the Public Health Service Act to require the Secretary of Health and Human Services to conduct and support research that utilizes human embryonic stem cells, regardless of the date on which the stem cells were derived from a human embryo, provided such embryos: (1) have been donated from in vitro fertilization clinics; (2) were created for the purposes of fertility treatment; (3) were in excess of the needs of the individuals seeking such treatment and would never be implanted in a woman and would otherwise be discarded (as determined in consultation with the individuals seeking fertility treatment); and (4) were donated by such individuals with written informed consent and without any financial or other inducements. This bill passed in the House on May 24, 2005 with a count of 238-194 (Congressional Homepage H.R. 810, 2005). The bill requires that President Bush's policy be repealed and replaced with measures that allow federal funding to support stem cells derived from excess embryos from IVF. Less than two weeks after the House bill was introduced, °n February 28, 2005, Senator Arlen Specter introduced a corresponding Senate Bill 471. Forty senators, from both sides of the aisle, cosponsored this bill. Cosponsors included Orrin Hatch, Hillary Rodham Clinton, Edward Kennedy, John Kerry, and Harry Reid (Congressional Homepage S. 471). This bill was read twice and then referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (Congressional Homepage S. 471, 2005). To supplement this bill, Senator Orrin Hatch introduced Senate Bill 876, the Human Cloning Ban and Stem Cell Research Protection Act of 2005. This bill prohibited human cloning, and set forth penalties for violations (Congressional Homepage S. 876, 2005). After Congress returned to session in September, 2005, there were multiple competing Senate bills. Each division makes it more difficult to unite supporters behind the same bill, something that would be necessary for any bill to have a chance of passage and to override a presidential veto. Alta Charo, a professor at the University of Wisconsin medical and law schools observed that for lawmakers "who want to appear to support embryonic stem cell research without alienating their conservative base, it gives them something they can vote for even if it continues to trade patient interests for political symbolism" (Connelly, 2005b). Herein lies a troubling aspect of the stem cell debate. It is possible that this issue could be decided not by what is best for the country, but by what keeps legislators in power. The immense positive and negative possibilities attached to what stem cell research can do are too important to be ruined by partisan power ploys. The White House Responds On May 20, 2005, four days before House Resolution 810 passed, President Bush reaffirmed his position on the stem cell debate. He promised that he would veto any legislation that went against his established policy. This potential veto would be his first (Baker, 2005). On May 24, 2005, President Bush held a press conference in response to the passage of House Resolution 810. The President attempted a different approach with this press conference, inviting 21 "snowflake" families. These were families that had either adopted or given up for adoption frozen embryos that remained after in vitro fertilization. With those 21 couples were the "snowflake" babies, the children that resulted from those embryos that were not destroyed. President Bush made the point that each embryo is unique and is capable of producing a child: The children here today remind us that there is no such thing as a spare embryo. Every embryo is unique and genetically complete, like every other human being. And each of us started out our life this way. Theses lives are not raw material to be exploited, but gifts. And I commend each of the families here today for accepting the gift of these children and offering them the gift of your love (Bush, 2005). Senator Frist Rocks the Boat On August 3, 2005 Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist announced that he supported the aforementioned legislation that would reverse President Bush's policy. Some members of Congress, as well as former first lady Nancy Reagan, an outspoken advocate of stem cell research, supported Frist's decision. Their approval was in contrast to the disapproval of pro-life conservatives who felt that Frist went against his anti-abortion stance (Connelly, 2005a). 21 |
