[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 152 (2006), Part 11]
[Senate]
[Page 14435]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                                SCHEDULE

  Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, we will have a period for the transaction 
of morning business this morning. Senators are reminded that we will 
begin the stem cell debate on Monday. Last night, we reached an 
agreement to allocate debate time in blocks, alternating back and forth 
between the majority and minority sides of the aisle. We will begin 
that debate on Monday at 12:30 p.m. and continue through Tuesday 
afternoon. Then we will proceed to votes on those bills--as a reminder, 
we have three bills and each of those three bills will have a 60-vote 
threshold--beginning at 3:45 p.m. on Tuesday. Those will be the first 
votes of the week.
  The issue of stem cell research is one this body has debated in the 
past, but what I hope we have been able to structure, in consultation 
with the Democratic side of the aisle, is a way to have a very good 
debate on what is a very complicated issue, both from a science 
standpoint and from an ethical and moral standpoint. It really does 
cause and force, in some ways, each of us as 100 Members of this body--
but equally the American people--to go back and address an issue which 
is the first major moral, ethical, and scientific dilemma, challenge 
before us in the 21st century. And it is a tough issue. It is 
something, as a physician, as a scientist, I have spent a lot of time 
with, as a transplant surgeon when we are moving tissues around all the 
time--a heart, a lung, which I routinely transplanted before coming 
here.
  It is a tough issue. It involves issues of life and death and 
promises of new cures for diabetes, Alzheimer's, Parkinson's. We have 
been prone, in this body and every legislative body, to overstatement, 
overpromising. I am very hopeful that the debate, the way we have it 
structured and giving people time to prepare for it, will help educate 
this body, help educate the American people on an issue that is not 
going to go away--not just stem cells but as we look at the various 
challenges that are opened by the Human Genome Project, a very 
successful project 15 years ago, finished about 5 years ago on this 
floor--and opens up all concerns of ethical debates.
  No matter whether people like it, no matter how hard it is, it is 
very important that this body become very comfortable in dealing with 
issues of advancing science and the great progress, the new 
opportunities we can make, whether it is addressing our 60 percent 
dependence on foreign sources of oil or looking at the great advances 
in health care and capturing the hopes and promise of new therapies. 
Whether it is genetic, biological stem cells, or the like means, we are 
going to have to do a good job in educating ourselves, developing that 
understanding, being comfortable talking about advances in science.
  Science used to advance like this, then this, and in the 21st 
century, science is advancing like this. We, representing the American 
people, have that responsibility to define that advancing science and 
where it crosses with ethics and morality.
  It is going to be a challenging debate, a good debate. I think the 
American people will pay attention, and I know our colleagues are 
working very hard on that particular issue.
  Last night in closing, I proposed a unanimous consent agreement on 
the Water Resources Development Act, the so-called WRDA Act, a bill I 
feel very strongly we do need to bring to the floor. Chairman Inhofe 
has done a tremendous job in packaging the bill so that we can address 
the various issues with, I believe, nine amendments in the unanimous 
consent request. The Democratic leader has objected to that request, 
but I am very hopeful we will be able to address that agreement later 
today.

                          ____________________