[Congressional Record Volume 145, Number 110 (Friday, July 30, 1999)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E1696-E1697]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




   EMBRYONIC STEM CELL RESEARCH: UNLAWFUL, UNACCEPTABLE, UNNECESSARY

                                 ______
                                 

                           HON. BOB SCHAFFER

                              of colorado

                    in the house of representatives

                        Thursday, July 29, 1999

  Mr. SCHAFFER. Mr. Speaker, President Clinton's National Bioethic 
Advisory Commission recommended the United States government fund the 
practice of killing human embryos for research purposes. On top of the 
release of the Commission's report, the Health and Human Services 
General Counsel has advocated the use of federal funds in using the 
destroyed embryos for research purposes. Mr. Speaker, funding 
destructive embryonic research with tax dollars is unlawful, 
unacceptable to the American people, and unnecessary since recent 
advancements reveal viable stem cell alternatives in adults.
  Mr. Speaker, in 1995 Congress successfully added the Dickey/Wicker 
amendment to FY 1996 Labor/HHS appropriations bill. Each year since 
then, Congress has reaffirmed this crucial amendment as part of our 
law. The Dickey/Wicker amendment prohibits the use of federal funds for 
the creation of a human embryo for research purposes or for research in 
which an embryo is ``destroyed, discarded or knowingly subjected to 
risk of injury or death.'' While HHS has tried to rewrite the current 
law

[[Page E1697]]

on embryo research, it is clear that Congress has prohibited all 
funding of ``research in which'' embryos are destroyed or discarded. 
Simply stated, the taxpayer funding of research which relies on the 
intentional killing of human beings would violate the law.
  Using federal funds for such an unlawful practice is anathema to the 
people of the United States. Already eight states have enacted laws 
that make destructive embryonic research illegal. According to a 1995 
Tarrance poll, 74 percent of Americans oppose the use of tax dollars 
for human embryo experimentation while 64 percent indicate ``very 
strong'' opposition. In addition, Bill Clinton, whose commission has 
not recommended the use of federal funds for destructive embryo 
research, issued a statement in December 1994 opposing the use of 
federal funds ``to support the creation of human embryos for research 
purposes.'' While the American people are quite evenly polarized on the 
issue of abortion, a majority of the population oppose the use of tax 
dollars to fund lethal research on human embryos.
  Furthermore, scientists have confirmed there is no medical necessity 
for embryonic stem cell research. Those who thought embryonic stem 
cells were the only or best hope for organ repair have been proven 
wrong. Recent advancements have led scientists to consider an 
alternative, adult-derived stem cells. According to D. Josefson's 
article in the British Medical Journal, new research suggesting that 
adult nerve stem cells ``can de-differentiate and reinvent themselves'' 
as blood-producing stem cells ``means that the need for fetal cells as 
a source of stem cells for medical research may soon be eclipsed by the 
more readily available and less controversial adult stem cells.'' The 
Wall Street Journal article by L. Johannes entitled, ``Adult Stem Cells 
Have Advantage Battling Disease,'' states that adult ``precursor'' or 
stem cells ``may prove much more useful to medical science'' than cells 
obtained by killing human embryos--that is, preborn human boys and 
girls. While scientists used to be concerned that there were no known 
adult stem cells for some critical organs, Harvard Medical School 
researcher Evan Y. Snyder now thinks ``we will find these stem cells in 
any organ that we look.''
  Mr. Speaker, killing preborn babies for tissue harvest is never 
justified. The logic of this practice is not unlike that of the Third 
Reich, where torture was rationalized for medical research. It is 
something no civilized nation should condone, much less fund with the 
tax dollars of conscientious, disapproving Americans. I defy anyone in 
this chamber to look me in the eye and say that the deliberate taking 
of a new life, a unique and growing human being, is a justifiable 
sacrifice for the curiosity of science. When there are non-lethal 
alternatives, I defy anyone to tell the American people they have no 
choice but to pay for these experiments in defiance of their 
conscience, the law, and the more fundamental principles of human 
dignity.

                          ____________________