Putting stem-cell research back on the front-burner

May 24, 2006

Exactly one year ago tomorrow, the [tag]House[/tag] easily passed [tag]bi-partisan[/tag] legislation that would remove restrictions on embryonic [tag]stem cell research[/tag]. The companion measure in the [tag]Senate[/tag] had a filibuster-proof majority, Bill Frist endorsed the bill and vowed to bring it to the floor, and [tag]polls[/tag] showed overwhelming support from the public. Newsweek’s Jonathan Alter wrote at the time, “Unless there’s another war, stem cells will become one of the defining issues of the 2006 [tag]campaign[/tag].”

It seemed we were finally on the brink of a breakthrough for science, medical research, and public health. And then … nothing. Frist came around on the policy, but hasn’t done anything about it. Now, there’s a growing consensus that the nation has waited long enough.

A full year after the House passed legislation that would loosen President Bush’s restrictions on human [tag]embryonic[/tag] [tag]stem cell[/tag] research, the Senate is coming under intense pressure to tackle the controversial bill — in the awkward new context of an election year.

The legislation, which Bush has repeatedly threatened to veto, would allow the National Institutes of Health to fund research on human embryos slated for destruction at fertility clinics. It is backed by science and patient-advocacy groups, and was endorsed by Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) last summer, when momentum behind the research was at a peak.

But the political calculus around stem cells has changed in unexpected ways since then, raising questions about how Frist can fulfill his promises to bring the bill to a vote without weakening his appeal to conservatives as he considers a 2008 presidential run.

To a certain extent, one could make an argument that there’s no hurry. The [tag]Bush[/tag] [tag]White House[/tag] has vowed to veto the legislation, so there’s little incentive to hurry up to watch the bill get killed. On the other hand, it’s just as likely the president might change his mind — he’s failed to follow through on veto threats before (transportation bill, McCain/Feingold), there’s a little wiggle room in Bush’s threat, and a [tag]veto[/tag] would hand the [tag]Democrats[/tag] a powerful issue in a campaign year that’s already going in their direction. There’s even an outside chance that there are enough votes to overturn a veto on this issue.

In the meantime, the pressure is about to heat up considerably.

The Coalition for the Advancement of Medical Research (CAMR) will hold a press event this morning in the park next to the Russell Senate Office Building that will feature patients stricken with ailments that, research supporters maintain, could be treated with therapies developed using the science.

The patients and CAMR representatives will be joined at the event by the bipartisan group of lawmakers who have pushed the bill in both chambers.

The office of Rep. Mike Castle (R-Del.) said yesterday that he and Rep. Diana DeGette (D-Colo), the House bill’s sponsors, will be there with Sens. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.), Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), Gordon Smith (R-Ore.), Tom Harkin (D-Iowa), Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) and Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.).

For that matter, those who read the New York Times print edition may have noticed yesterday that the Campaign to Defend the Constitution took out a full-page ad (.pdf) yesterday arguing that the legislation has been “held hostage by religious extremists who hold enormous sway over Majority Leader Bill Frist.” The ad’s headline reads, “Meet America’s most influential stem cell [tag]scientists[/tag],” which then shows pictures of [tag]Pat Robertson[/tag], [tag]Jerry Falwell[/tag], and [tag]James Dobson[/tag].

I know there are plenty of issues to consider in a campaign context, but I still believe stem-cell research has such broad bi-partisan support, Dems would be foolish to let this opportunity slip away. Bush and the GOP base are standing in the way of a [tag]public health[/tag] breakthrough. The more Dems remind voters of this, the better.

Why does it seem that the Democrats have just gone away? Reid caving on judge confirmations? Pelosi caving on Jefferson (“it’s his district’s problem”)? Isn’t there anything on which we’re willing to go down to noble defeat? Actually, we’re already in defeat, but making the “old college try” is the proper role of a party which has allowed itself to sink to minority status for so long. The Democrats are too timid and lazy to even do that.

  • I agree, stop being such pussie’s and put up a fight!! It’s what everybody wants them to do anyway.

  • The Republicans are about to lob a crapstorm of “wedge issues” our way: gay marriage, flag-burning, the whole tiresome lot. We have to start firing back–and stem cell research is the best arrow in our quiver.

    It also has the nice secondary effect of contrasting our wedge issues–legislation that could lead to millions of lives saved–with their insipid garbage.

  • Right on, dajafi. That’s it in a nutshell (or is it nutcase?). Frist thinks posturing on gay marriage is more important than saving lives.

  • We’ve alreay dithered on this long enough that Europe and Asia will soon be kicking our collective asses on the research, since they have no policy qualms on the issue for the most part. Im sure we will much up this issue much much longer, just so we can ensure that our researchers finally decide to leave en masse for greener pastures.

  • That’s a good point from G2000. There’s an economic aspect to this which has gone almost totally overlooked. California kicked in its own money a couple years back, largely with this in mind; any sense of how that investment seems to be paying off for the Golden State?

  • dajafi,

    stem cell research is not product development. It will be years before any therapies or new drugs come out of the basic research that California is funding.

  • If the Dems push this one—and push it hard—then Frist will in all likelihood find himself in an extremely untenable position, being (1) staying close to the whacko Reich and his meager aspirations for the Oval Office, or (2) establishing some real integrity for “what’s really best for the People”—and thereby creating the possibility of being a mainstream contender in 2008. The choice, of course, is his to make—but breaking promises that are based on his understanding of medical theories, just to appease the people who peddle “PhatPat’s Jeezuz-Joose” isn’t going to endear him to a majority of votors a couple years from now….

    • Comments are closed.