Odds and Ends From Senate Stem Cell Debate

Here's some sound bites from yesterday's Senate debate on the three stem cell bills that will receive a vote this afternoon.

Carl Levin (D-MI) speaks on using embryos that would otherwise be destroyed and America's leadership in research:

"The logic of some embryonic stem cell research opponents is totally befuddling. They are apparently willing to ignore the discarding of the embryos by fertility clinics, but they label as morally objectionable the life-giving use of embryos which would otherwise be discarded. I believe that embryonic stem cell research is truly a life-giving, not a life-destroying, process because of the extraordinary potential for healing living, breathing human beings who have names and faces and loved ones.

"While the President is fighting against research in America, other countries are pressing ahead. America has always been at the forefront of scientific innovation, and we could do this research faster, more efficiently, and more ethically than most other countries. We also have an obligation to speed its potential benefits to the American people and to people around the world."

Tim Johnson (D-SD) on choosing "life-giving" research:

"Stem cell research is conducted with egg cells fertilized in a laboratory for the sole purpose of assisting childless couples who wish to have a baby. After choosing embryos for implantation in the mother, the remainder are routinely destroyed as medical waste. I believe these cells, of which hundreds of thousands are now stored at fertility clinics, would be better used to advance medical research that holds great promise for curing or preventing some of the world's worst diseases, as well as for repairing spinal cord and other injuries. I believe choosing research over incineration is a moral choice.

"My South Dakota values, my religious faith, and my commitment to South Dakota families tell me we must choose life-giving research over incineration of these cells."

Olympia Snowe (R-ME) talks about how America can lead or follow on medical research:

"There can be no doubt that stem cell research will move forward. The real question is whether our Nation will be engaged ..... whether our scientists will realize the breakthroughs ..... whether we will produce the treatments. Or whether those developments will draw our best minds and new medical investment abroad, where American vision and oversight will not influence the future of medicine.

"I believe in stem cell research. More than 70 percent of the American people believe in stem cell research. I believe in it because I cannot look at a person suffering from a debilitating, and even fatal disease and support prohibitions which impede ethical research aimed at alleviating of that suffering."

Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) cites the sheer silliness of the Santorum bill:

"The Fetus Farming Prohibition Act bans activities that occur in horror movies, not in our research labs. We should not allow these farfetched and frightening techniques, which no respected scientist anywhere endorses, to distract from the plight of millions of Americans seeking cures from devastating diseases."

Barack Obama (D-IL) on consensus and the one big roadblock:

"Democrats want this bill passed. Conservative pro-life Republicans want this bill passed. By large margins, the American people want this bill passed. It is only the White House right now that is standing in the way of progress, standing in the way of so many potential cures."

Jim Bunning (R-KY) says why embryos should be destroyed, versus using them to save lives:

"As an opponent of the destruction of human embryos, I believed the Bush administration's decision to allow the embryonic stem cell research was misguided. H.R. 810 goes even further than the current policy. It cancels the protections of the 2001 cutoff for research by allowing research of all embryonic stem cells created from in vitro fertilization treatments. This legislation would move us in the wrong direction on this issue.

"Some have said that these excess embryos which would be used for research would be destroyed anyway. However, I do not think this makes ethical sense. Just because these budding lives will not survive does not mean that we should ghoulishly conduct experiments on them."

Dick Durbin (D-IL) calls Bush on compassionate conservatism:

"I have met the victims of ALS and diabetes and Parkinson's and Alzheimer's. I know they are praying we do the right thing tomorrow. I hope we pass this bill. I am not certain it will pass, but I am hopeful it will. It will have strong support on this side of the aisle, and I hope there will be enough votes on both sides of the aisle to enact it. Then the bill will go to President Bush, and he will have a moment in the history of this country to make a momentous decision. If he decides to go forward and veto the stem cell research bill, it will be the first veto of the Bush Presidency.

"President Bush described himself politically when he ran for office as a compassionate conservative. His decision on the future of this bill will be the test of his compassion. If he has compassion for those who are suffering across America, who are praying for the hope this research can bring, I hope he will pray over his decision long and hard. And if we pass this bill, I hope he will sign it and give these Americans a chance for a better tomorrow."

Tom Harkin (D-IA) slaps one of H.R. 810's primary opponents, Tom Coburn (R-OK), when he continues to say that stem cells cause tumors:

Coburn: Here is the key point that needs to be made in this debate: If you use your own cells, you will not have tumors, you will not have teratomas, and you will not have rejection. If you use embryonic stem cells, you will have tumors, you will have teratomas, and you will have rejection.

That is what we know. That is why I, as a scientist, have not raised the life issue here once, but I am adamantly pro-life. I believe the science is so far ahead of this debate. When everyone knows what is really going on in terms of research, they are going to want the dollars put into the stem cells, both in terms of dedifferentiation--we know we can differentiate cells backward to make them pluripotent--and also to isolate cells from our own human body to use back on us. That is an important part of the debate.

Harkin: I again say that all the Nobel scientists, all of the leading scientists in America simply do not agree with the Senator from Oklahoma. These are the people involved in cell biology and that kind of research.

The Senator says embryonic stem cells will produce tumors. We do not know that is true. We do not have any real long-term data to know anything about how embryonic stem cells will work later on.

More Harkin:

"I get back to the point that when you have almost every disease group in this country supporting the bill that is before us, H.R. 810, you have Nobel laureates, scientists, doctors, and you have 19 Directors of NIH saying that this has great potential, then I say, again, to my friends that you have to make either one of two assumptions. Either all of these people have been hoodwinked and they do not know what they are talking about or they have no care or concern about ethics or morals or anything else.

"I think both assumptions are wrong. I think these people know. They are informed. They may not know every little thing medical doctors might know, but they know the potential. Second, I think they are vastly ethical and moral people."

The vote is scheduled for late this afternoon.

You can reach Bob Geiger at geiger.bob@gmail.com