    [Weekly Compilation of Presidential Documents Volume 33, Number 10 (Monday, March 10, 1997)]
    [Pages 278-281]
    [Online from the Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

    <R04>
    Remarks Announcing the Prohibition on Federal Funding for Cloning of
    Human Beings and an Exchange With Reporters

    March 4, 1997

        The President. Good morning. I'm glad to be joined this morning by
    the Vice President, Secretary Shalala, Dr. Harold Varmus, the head of
    NIH; Dr. Harold Shapiro, the president of Princeton and the Chairman of
    our Bioethics Advisory Commission; and Dr. Jack Gibbons, the President's
    Adviser on Science and Technology, all of whom know a lot about and care
    a lot about this issue we are discussing today.
        The recent breakthrough in animal cloning is one that could yield
    enormous benefits, enabling us to reproduce the most productive strains
    of crop and livestock, holding out the promise of revolutionary new
    medical treatments and cures, helping to unlock the greatest secrets of
    the genetic code. But like the splitting of the atom, this is a
    discovery that carries burdens as well as benefits.
        Science often moves faster than our ability to understand its
    implications. That is why we have a responsibility to move with caution
    and care to harness the powerful forces of science and technology so
    that we can reap the benefit while minimizing the potential danger.
        This new discovery raises the troubling prospect that it might
    someday be possible to clone human beings from our own genetic

    [[Page 279]]

    material. There is much about cloning that we still do not know. But
    this much we do know: Any discovery that touches upon human creation is
    not simply a matter of scientific inquiry; it is a matter of morality
    and spirituality as well.
        My own view is that human cloning would have to raise deep concerns,
    given our most cherished concepts of faith and humanity. Each human life
    is unique, born of a miracle that reaches beyond laboratory science. I
    believe we must respect this profound gift and resist the temptation to
    replicate ourselves.
        At the very least, however, we should all agree that we need a
    better understanding of the scope and implications of this most recent
    breakthrough. Last week, I asked our National Bioethics Advisory
    Commission, headed by President Harold Shapiro of Princeton, to conduct
    a thorough review of the legal and the ethical issues raised by this new
    cloning discovery and to recommend possible actions to prevent its
    abuse, reporting back to me by the end of May.
        In the meantime, I am taking further steps to prevent human cloning.
    The Federal Government currently restricts the use of Federal funds for
    research involving human embryos. After reviewing these restrictions,
    our administration believes that there are loopholes that could allow
    the cloning of human beings if the technology were developed. Therefore,
    today I am issuing a directive that bans the use of any Federal funds
    for any cloning of human beings.
        Effective immediately, no Federal agency may support, fund, or
    undertake such activity. Of course, a great deal of research and
    activity in this area is supported by private funds. That is why I am
    urging the entire scientific and medical community, every foundation,
    every university, every industry that supports work in this area to heed
    the Federal Government's example. I'm asking for a voluntary moratorium
    on the cloning of human beings until our Bioethics Advisory Commission
    and our entire Nation have had a real chance to understand and debate
    the profound ethical implications of the latest advances.
        As we gain a fuller understanding of this technology, we must
    proceed not just with caution but also with a conscience. By insisting
    that not a single taxpayer dollar supports human cloning, and by urging
    a moratorium on all private research in this area, we can ensure that as
    we move forward on this issue, we weigh the concerns of faith and family
    and philosophy and values, not merely of science alone. Thank you very
    much.

    1996 Campaign Financing

        Q. Mr. President, how do you think the Vice President did in his
    rebuttal yesterday, and do you agree with him that you two are in a
    separate category in terms of fundraising from Federal property?
        The President. Well, I agree with--number one, I thought he did very
    well, and I agree with the statement he made, and I agree that what he
    did was legal. But I also agree with the decision that he made.
        I would remind you that we knew that he had a very stiff challenge.
    We were fighting a battle not simply for our reelection but over the
    entire direction of the country for years to come and the most historic
    philosophical battle we've had in America in quite a long time over the
    direction of the budget, over our commitment to education, over whether
    we would dismantle large chunks of our environmental regulations and our
    public health regulations. It was a significant thing for America, and
    we knew that we were going to be outspent and outraised, but we knew we
    had to do everything we could to at least be competitive enough to get
    our message out.
        In fact, that is what happened. We were outspent and outraised by
    more than $200 million, but thanks to the Vice President's efforts and
    those of thousands of others and a million small donors, we were able to
    get our message out.
        Q. But did you overdo it in a sense that now you're regretting,
    obviously--you must be--all the things that have happened since then?
        The President. The only thing I regret--and I regret this very much
    as I have said--is that a decision was made, which I did not approve of
    or know about, to stop the rigorous review of checks coming in to the
    Democratic Committee so that some funds were accepted which should not
    have been accepted. I regret that very much. And I have said

    [[Page 280]]

    that I feel--as the titular head of the Democratic Party, I feel
    responsible for that. I think all of us in the line of command are. And
    I was very proud of Governor Romer and Mr. Grossman and the entire
    Democratic Committee. When they made a full accounting, they went over
    all the checks, they did something as far as I know no party has done in
    modern history, and they gave back money that was not only clearly
    illegal but that was questionable, and they're going on. I regret that
    very much, because that never should have happened in the first place.
        For the rest, I think the Vice President said he thought that some
    changes were in order, but I don't regret the fact that we worked like
    crazy to raise enough money to keep from being rolled over by the
    biggest juggernaut this country had seen in a very long time. And I
    think it would have been a very bad thing for the American people if
    that budget had passed, if their plans to dramatically dismantle the
    environmental protections and the public health protections the country
    had passed, and I am glad we stood up to it. I'm glad we fought the
    battles of '95 and '96, and I'm glad it came out the way it did. And we
    had to be aggressive and strong within the law, and I'm very proud of
    what the Vice President did.
        Q. Don't you think it puts the Vice President in a vulnerable----

    Human Cloning

        Q. Mr. President, what is the extent of your order today? How much
    funds--do you know how much funds were being spent toward this human
    cloning, if any?
        The President. We attempted previously to have a ban on this, going
    back to '94, I believe. The nature of the new discovery raised the
    prospect that the technology was not covered specifically by the nature
    of the ban. So as far as I know, nothing is going on in Government-
    funded research. I just want to make sure that we keep it that way,
    because our research dollars are spread all across the country in
    different institutions.
        With regard to the private sector, let me say that our staff here in
    the White House has been in touch with a number of people in the biotech
    industry, and they seem to be glad that we called and anxious to
    participate in a moratorium until we think through the implications of
    this.
        I mean, I imagine a lot of you, not as journalists but in your own
    private homes, have sat around talking about this discovery in the last
    few days. I know we have in our home. And I just think that we need the
    best minds that we can bring to bear and the distinguished people on the
    bioethics advisory committee to think through this, tell us about what
    we may be missing about if there's anything positive that could come
    from this, and also think through the other implications.
        How can we get the benefits of our deep desire to find any possible
    cure for any malady that's out there without raising the kind of ethical
    implications that, in effect, we're in the business where people are
    trying to play God or to replicate themselves.

    1996 Campaign Financing

        Q. Mr. President, Democrats and Republicans are bogged down in
    Congress over whether to conduct hearings on the fundraising issue. Do
    you want to see that happen, and would you so tell your Democrats, your
    fellow Democrats up on the Hill?
        The President. My understanding is that the Democrats have no
    objection whatever to the hearings. They just believe that they ought
    not to go on forever and that they don't need to--they're disputing
    whether $6\1/2\ million needs to be spent. That's something that they
    need to work out among themselves.
        I certainly have no objection to hearings. I've always assumed that
    they would occur, but I think that the American people are entitled to
    know that some prudence will be exercised in how much money is spent,
    because there's a lot of other things out there to be done, and we have
    the public's business to get on with as well--a lot of other issues that
    need to be dealt with. And what I'm hoping that we can do is to just
    reconcile how this is going to be dealt with and maybe spend some of
    that money to properly fund the Federal Election Commission so they can
    do the kind of audits they're supposed to do and do the job that they
    actually have the power to do on the books right now and get on with the
    big business, get on with balancing the budget, get on with passing the

    [[Page 281]]

    education program, get on with doing the other things that are out there
    for us to do. And so I'm going to do everything I can to facilitate
    that.
        But it is a decision for the Senate and for the House--in the
    House--to decide how these hearings will proceed and how they will be
    funded. But I don't think anybody objects to having hearings. We want
    them to be fair. We want them to be bipartisan. We want them to be
    balanced. And as I understand it, the big fight in the Senate is, will
    there be a date certain for ending, and will there be a limit to how
    much is spent?
        And let me say this: Whatever the hearings produce, in the end, the
    only real question is, will they produce campaign finance reform?
    Whatever they produce, will they produce campaign finance reform? I
    still believe that the only way for the Congress to really deal with
    this and any questions from the past is to change the system. And we
    have the McCain-Feingold bill out there. It's a good vehicle. I have
    endorsed it. I would happily sign it the way it is, but they may want to
    debate that in some way or another. But the main thing that I want to
    say again is that there is no excuse for not voting on and passing a
    good bipartisan campaign finance reform bill this year. There is no
    excuse. That is the main issue.
        Thank you.

    Note: The President spoke at 9:25 a.m. in the Oval Office at the White
    House.