[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 152 (2006), Part 12]
[House]
[Pages 15818-15819]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




 VETO ON STEM CELL RESEARCH PUTS A ROADBLOCK IN THE WAY OF SCIENTIFIC 
                                PROGRESS

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Meehan) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. MEEHAN. Mr. Speaker, the European Union agreed today to continue 
its funding for embryonic stem cell research, research specifically 
involving the use of embryos that would otherwise be discarded from 
fertility clinics. Today's agreement among the European nations paves 
the way for a 55 billion Euro science program designed to improve and 
move this important research forward. Unfortunately, Europe's progress 
is in stark contrast to the embarrassing path chartered by the White 
House.
  Mr. Speaker, America has long had a history of leading the world in 
scientific discovery are. President John Fitzgerald Kennedy made it a 
national priority to be the first Nation in the world to send a man to 
the moon. His leadership showed the rest of the world that the United 
States was the undisputed international leader in scientific progress.
  By using his very first presidential veto to continue a misguided ban 
on stem cell research, President Bush has diminished American 
scientific standing in the world.

[[Page 15819]]

  Mr. Speaker, 5 years ago, President Bush said that stem cell research 
had profound ethical questions. Today, I say that there are no more 
profound ethical questions than the fate of 100 million American lives, 
lives that can be saved, lives that will be lost if we don't move this 
vital research forward.
  Last week, we sent to the White House a bipartisan bill that 
ethically advances stem cell research, a practice supported by 70 
percent of Americans. Instead of embracing stem cell research, 
President Bush chose this moment in time to strike a blow against 
science and against hope and against saving lives.
  The promise of stem cell research is great. One researcher at Harvard 
Medical School wrote in the New England Journal of Medicine, ``The 
science of human embryonic stem cells is in its infancy,'' but he 
cautioned restricting stem cell research would ``threaten to starve 
this field at a critical stage.''
  Last October, the prestigious, peer-reviewed Journal of Immunology 
featured a study by four researchers from the University of Minnesota 
who developed human embryonic stem cells that could destroy cancerous 
cells.
  Mr. Speaker, when we tout the potential for stem cell research to 
develop future treatment for diseases like cancer, like Parkinson's, 
opponents of the research will say we are just dreamers, that the proof 
just isn't there. Well, Mr. Speaker, four cancer survivors live on my 
street in Lowell, Massachusetts. Shame on anyone who would take a dream 
away from them.
  Nearly 35,000 cases of leukemia were diagnosed last year. In fact, 
about 30 percent of cancers in children from birth to 14 years of age 
are leukemia. Today, scientists are using embryonic stem cells to treat 
leukemia and lymphoma.
  We are dreamers, Mr. Speaker, but those dreams are supported by hard 
science and research. Stem cells have the potential to develop into any 
kind of body tissue, including blood, brain, or nerve tissue. 
Scientists believe that this unique ability can lead to even more 
breakthroughs in the number of illnesses that now are untreatable.
  With his rebuff of stem cells, just like ignoring the warnings about 
global warming, this President has put his head in the sand at 
America's peril. America needs a new direction that supports science 
and promotes innovation.
  As one of the world's foremost medical science centers, my home State 
of Massachusetts has played a critical role in the stem cell debate. 
Not only are our hospitals, research facilities and institutions of 
higher learning on the cutting edge of conquering disease, they are 
also major economic drivers keeping us competitive in the global 
economy. The life sciences industry employs roughly 30,000 people in 
Massachusetts alone.
  The President's rejection of domestic stem cell research does not 
mean an end to the research elsewhere in the world. This research will 
go forward. But the President has chosen to leave America behind and 
hamper our scientific competitiveness.
  The President's veto also has put Massachusetts, the world's most 
powerful engine of innovation and progress, on the sidelines. To put it 
in perspective, consider that Massachusetts alone has over 250 
biotechnology firms, and that is more than all of Western Europe 
combined.
  I believe the choice is clear: We should support stem cell research 
in Massachusetts and throughout the country. It is our tradition of 
innovation and science and, most importantly, it will offer hope to 
millions of Americans suffering from diseases that one day may be 
cured.
  The President has shamefully put a roadblock in the way of scientific 
progress. The American people deserve better.

                          ____________________