[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 152 (2006), Part 6]
[Senate]
[Pages 7248-7249]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




      ALTERNATIVE PLURIPOTENT STEM CELL THERAPIES ENHANCEMENT ACT

  Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I have sought recognition to cosponsor 
and speak in support of legislation introduced by Senator Santorum 
called the Alternative Pluripotent Stem Cell Therapies Enhancement Act. 
This bill would authorize research into deriving stem cells using 
alternative methods that would not result in the destruction of a human 
embryo.
  This legislation, which Senator Santorum and I have drafted in close 
partnership, represents a good faith effort to find common ground among 
those who support human embryonic stem cell research and those who do 
not. This bill is fully complementary to legislation that Senators 
Harkin, Hatch, Feinstein, Smith, and Kennedy have introduced--the Stem 
Cell Research Enhancement Act of 2005--which would allow Federal 
funding for research on additional human embryonic stem cell lines. It 
will move forward research that could potentially eliminate the 
objections that some have to embryonic stem cell research while 
achieving the same goals. However, let me be clear, this legislation is 
not a substitute for supporting H.R. 810, the House-passed version of 
the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act of 2005.
  I believe medical research should be pursued with all possible haste 
to cure the diseases and maladies affecting Americans. In my capacity 
as Chairman of the Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education 
Appropriations Subcommittee, I have backed up this belief by supporting 
increases in funding for the National Institutes of Health. I have said 
many times that the NIH is the crown jewel of the Federal Government--
perhaps the only jewel of the Federal government. When I came to the 
Senate in 1981, NIH spending totaled $3.6 billion. In fiscal year 2006, 
NIH received a little over $29 billion to fund its pursuit of life-
saving research. The successes realized by this investment in NIH have 
spawned revolutionary advances in our knowledge and treatment for 
diseases such as cancer, Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease, 
mental illnesses, diabetes, osteoporosis, heart disease, ALS and many 
others. It is clear to me that Congress's commitment to the NIH is 
paying off. This is the time to seize the scientific opportunities that 
lie before us, and to ensure that all avenues of research toward 
cures--including stem cell research--are open for investigation.
  In 1998, I learned of the discovery of human embryonic stem cells. 
These cells have the ability to become any type of cell in the human 
body. Another way of saying this is that the cells are pluripotent. The 
consequences of this unique property of stem cells are far-reaching and 
are key to their potential use in therapies. Scientists and doctors 
with whom I spoke--and who have since testified before my 
Appropriations Subcommittee at 17 stem cell-related hearings--were 
excited by this discovery. They believed that these cells could be used 
to replace damaged or malfunctioning cells in patients with a wide 
range of diseases, This could lead to cures and treatments for maladies 
such as Juvenile Diabetes, Parkinson's disease, Alzheimer's disease, 
cardiovascular diseases, and spinal cord injury.
  Senator Harkin and I took the lead on making Federal funding 
available for this promising research. On the issue of funding human 
embryonic stem cell research, I along with Senators Harkin, Hatch, 
Feinstein, Smith, and Kennedy are the Senate sponsors of the Stem Cell 
Research Act of 2005, which we hope will soon be coming up for a vote 
in the Senate. That critical bill would enable Federal funding of stem 
cell research with new human embryonic stem cell lines.
  Embryonic stem cells are derived from embryos that would otherwise 
have been discarded. During the course of in vitro fertilization--IVF--
therapies, sperm and several eggs are combined in a laboratory to 
create 4 to 16 embryos for a couple having difficulty becoming 
pregnant. The embryos grow in an incubator for 5 to 7 days until they 
contain approximately 100 cells. To maximize the chances of success, 
several embryos are implanted into the woman. The remaining embryos are 
frozen for future use. If the woman becomes pregnant after the first 
implantation, and does not want to have more pregnancies, the remaining 
embryos are in excess of clinical need and can

[[Page 7249]]

be donated for research. Embryonic stem cells are derived from these 
embryos--destroying the embryo in the process. This process raises 
concerns for some, including my distinguished colleague Senator 
Santorum.
  Although I disagree with the calculus that embryos should be 
discarded rather than used in research, I recognize and appreciate 
these deeply felt objections. In fact, I took the lead on creating an 
embryo adoption awareness campaign in fiscal year 2002, and continue to 
include $2 million for that campaign in the HHS appropriation. If these 
embryos are likely to be donated to families that cannot conceive, I 
want this to be the first choice. However, with 400,000 frozen embryos 
in IVF clinics around the country, the supply far exceeds the demand 
and embryos are being discarded. Nonetheless, I want to pursue this and 
other options to address the objections of some of my colleagues.
  When the President's Council on Bioethics reported on several 
theoretical methods for deriving stem cells without destroying embryos, 
I immediately scheduled a hearing to investigate these ideas. On July 
12, 2005, the Labor-HHS Subcommittee heard testimony from five 
witnesses describing several theoretical techniques for deriving stem 
cells without destroying embryos. All five witnesses supported moving 
forward with the alternative methods without abandoning embryonic stem 
cell research. The alternative stem cells would theoretically also have 
the key ability to become any type of cell. Let me briefly mention 
several of the techniques discussed at the hearing.
  Dr. Robert Lanza of Advanced Cell Technologies claims to have derived 
stem cells from a single cell extracted from 2-day-old, eight-celled 
mouse embryos. This single cell is called a blastomere and its removal 
from human embryos does not destroy the original embryo. Scientists 
know a single cell can be taken from a 2-day-old embryo without 
destroying it, because it is routinely done in pre-implantation genetic 
diagnosis.
  Dr. William Hurlbut, a Stanford University bioethicist, supports a 
technique where a cloned embryo would be created whose DNA is mutated 
such that it cannot develop into a baby. This altered embryo would be 
destroyed for its stem cells. Since the embryo never had the potential 
to produce a baby, some of the objections normally raised with 
embryonic stem cell research would be circumvented.
  Several scientists have suggested deriving stem cells from 
technically dead embryos. When embryos frozen during in-vitro 
fertilization are thawed, some never resume dividing and thus are 
discarded.
  Many scientists are attempting to turn back the clock on older cells 
so they again become ``pluripotent,'' the scientific term for the 
ability to turn into any tissue. Scientists already are trying to do 
this to some degree through ``adult stem cell'' research, such as 
turning blood-making cells into cells that produce liver or muscle 
tissues.
  The legislation, which Senator Santorum and I have drafted, is meant 
to encourage these alternative methods for deriving stem cells without 
harming human embryos. The act amends the Public Health Service Act by 
inserting a section that:
  (1) Mandates that the Secretary of Health and Human Services shall 
support meritorious peer-reviewed research to develop techniques for 
the derivation of stem cells without creating or destroying human 
embryos.
  (2) Requires the Secretary to issue guidelines within 90 days to 
implement this research and to identify and prioritize the next 
research steps.
  (3) Requires the Secretary to consider techniques outlined by the 
President's Council on Bioethics, such as altered nuclear transfer and 
single cell derivation.
  (4) Requires the Secretary to report yearly on the activities carried 
out under this authorization.
  (5) Includes a ``Rule of Construction'' stating: ``Nothing in this 
section shall be construed to affect any policy, guideline, or 
regulation regarding embryonic stem cell research, human cloning by 
somatic cell nuclear transfer, or any other research not specifically 
authorized by this section.''
  (6) Defines ``human embryo'' by reference to the latest definition 
contained in the appropriations act for the Department of Health and 
Human Services.
  (7) Authorizes ``such sums as may be necessary'' for fiscal years 
2007 through 2009.
  Knowing that scientists never know exactly which research will lead 
to the next great cure, I have always supported opening as many avenues 
of research as possible. Based on that line of reasoning, I have always 
supported human embryonic, adult, and cord blood stem cell research. My 
goal is to see cures for the various afflictions that lower the quality 
of life--or end the lives--of Americans.
  The Santorum/Specter bill focuses attention on one of those avenues 
of research. I must emphasize that this bill is not a substitute for 
support of human embryonic stem cell research or support for H.R. 810. 
The two bills are complementary in their scope and together will 
advance our understanding of biomedical science and bring us another 
step closer to the cures and treatment that we all desire.

                          ____________________