Stem Cell Research: States Lead the Way Forward
Embryonic stem cell research in America is stymied by restrictive federal
funding, which dangerously slows progress on critical medical cures.
Federal funding can only be applied to research on 21 older stem cell
lines, many of which are contaminated and unusable. Yet thousands of
excess embryos that could be used to create more stem cell lines are
discarded from fertility clinics every year.
Congress
is considering federal legislation this spring to expand the number
of eligible lines. The Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act of 2007 has
already passed through the House and is expected to pass in the
Senate as well, but it is unclear if it will have enough votes to
overturn President Bush’s expected veto.
In
the face of federal roadblocks to embryonic stem cell research,
states have been left to determine innovative ways to fund research
on their own and carry the burden of assuring that America continues
to compete with other nations in the race for life-saving cures.
Progress in the
States:
Eight states have so
far adopted measures that provide funding for stem cell research:
California, Connecticut, Illinois, Maryland, Maine, New Jersey, Ohio,
and Wisconsin. In many cases, these states have been able to find the
necessary money to fund embryonic stem cell research by developing
public-private relationships.
New Jersey is building
a $50 million institute funded by multiple sources, including private
grants from corporations and the creative use of grants from the
National Institutes of Health. The institute is jointly operated by
the University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey and Rutgers
University with gubernatorial oversight.
Utilizing resources
from multiple sources has proven to be an effective means of
supporting state stem cell research. As such, states with prominent
universities and a private sector willing to allocate some funding to
investing in biomedical research should continue to pursue this
cutting edge research in their state.
The Missouri Ballot
Initiative:
States can also ensure
that the research is protected without allocating funding for
research. Missouri does not provide
funding, but it did pass a ballot initiative amending the state
constitution to ensure that embryonic stem cell research will remain
legal. The initiative, which had broad popular support despite being
in a state where anti-abortion is the state’s No. 1 lobby, ensures
that Missouri patients will have equal access to any federally
approved stem cell cures, that researchers will be able to conduct
any federally permissible research and creates responsible ethical
guidelines for stem cell research, including a strict ban on any
attempt to clone a human being.
Steven
Teitelbaum, Messing
Professor of Pathology and Immunology
at the Washington
University School of Medicine in St. Louis, explains that the
campaign was able to garner support from faith leaders,
organizations, physicians, and other diverse groups simply by
clarifying the facts. “When we sat down with faith groups and
others who were leery of this initiative and explained to them the
life saving potential for this science and the myths being pushed by
conservatives,” he explained, “people understood how critical the
initiative was to Missouri and the country.”
If
Congress does not override the expected presidential veto of
legislation to allow funding for research using newer stem cell
lines, states such as California, Wisconsin, and Connecticut will
have to continue providing leadership on this important issue. But
states can only take the country so far. Effective pursuit of any
research requires collaboration, coordination, and funding resources
that are only possible with significant federal involvement. Until
the federal government fully supports this research, however, states
must continue to take the lead and help advance progress in this
life-saving research.
States must overcome a
number of obstacles in order to pass legislation that funds or
supports stem cell research. The following provides a description two
of these obstacles and describes what states have done to overcome
them.
Funding: Wisconsin
Governor Doyle has been
successful in making Missouri a stem cell leader largely due to a
committed collaborative effort between the University of Wisconsin
and trade organizations such as the Wisconsin Technology Council and
the Governor’s office to build and promote industry around the
University’s cutting-edge embryonic stem cell research.
Governor Doyle has
allocated hundreds of millions of dollars of state funds to support
university research, venture capital for startup bio-medical
companies, and streamlining government bureaucratic hurdles for
university faculty to become entrepreneurs. He has committed to a
continued investment of $105 million over the
next five years in research, education, and public health efforts at
the University of Wisconsin Medical School and the Medical College of
Wisconsin in order to aid progress in areas such as regenerative
medicine, stem cell research, molecular medicine, neuroscience, and
cancer research.
These
efforts have helped attract some of the countries best scientists and
bio-tech companies to Wisconsin. The state has created new jobs,
increased revenue, and made itself into one of the foremost places in
the world for the potential development of life-saving cures.
Morality
and Religion: Missouri
Missouri
is traditionally a more conservative state, and both U.S. Senators
voted last year against embryonic stem cell legislation. Yet research
advocates in the state were able to persuade individuals,
legislators, and both secular and religious groups to put the
expansion of stem cell research on the 2006 ballot.
The
Missouri Coalition for Life Saving Cures, the central supporter of
the ballot initiative, concerned itself with public education,
engaging religious groups, and focusing on the potential
beneficiaries of embryonic stem cell research. The group created a
website that provided resources on the myths and facts about the
amendment. They worked with local religious figures such as Rev. John
Danforth to spread the message to religious groups. And they also
brought patients into the public discussion so that people could see
the individuals who would benefit from this research.
The
Coalition also brought scientists and patients to the legislature to
individually meet with the most conservative legislators and lay out
the facts. At the end of each meeting, legislators more often than
not came out in support of this research. By reaching out to a broad
range of groups and citizens, the group was able to garner widespread
support for this amendment.
If you would like more information on how your
state can follow the model of Wisconsin or Missouri, please contact
us at stateprogress@americanprogress.org.
Jonathan Moreno discusses the challenges to securing state-level legislation that supports embryonic stem cell research. Responding to the moral controversy this issue often raises, Moreno shows how advocates can find support in faith communities, as well as the scientific community’s eagerness to have a voice in public debates on the issue, discussing examples of states that have been successful in passing such legislation. The interview also explains why amniotic stem cells are not a viable and less controversial alternative to embryonic stem cells for researchers.
Highlights:
“The critical issue here is not the dollars, it’s the message that a state [sends] to people who are interested in investing in this research and to scientists…who may be interested in participating in this research, which is clearly the future of medicine.”
“…part of our duty on Earth is to help people who are in need. I think, to a great extent, this competing value… has really gotten lost in this [debate] in the last few years. My hope is that progressives can, with people in faith traditions, begin to bring that value back into the center of conversation.”
“It’s very revelatory that people do want to hear from scientists; they respect the scientific voice. I think it would be very important for activists, elected officials and advocates to identify scientists [and good teachers] in universities and research centers in their states who…will explain, in ways that everyone can understand, why this is important, and where the science is going.”
Read the full interview here. Or download and listen to the complete audio (.mp3, 20 min, 5.7mb)
Adam Jentleson, Manager of Congressional Affairs at the Center for American Progress provides an overview of the Congressional week ahead. For more information please contact Adam at stateprogress@americanprogress.org.
Three things will occupy most of Congress’ time this week: debating the war in Iraq, getting minimum wage legislation through the Senate, and passing a Continuing Resolution to keep the government funded through the rest of the year.
The minimum wage legislation will be the first agenda item for the Senate. A cloture vote is set for Tuesday, with members expecting a vote on final passage then or Wednesday.
The package that the Senate will vote on will likely include the $8 billion package of tax cuts supported by the Republican leadership and some Democrats, including Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-MT).
Since key House Democrats – chief among them Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charlie Rangel (D-NY) – have expressed strong opposition to including the tax cut package in a final version, and since supporters of the measure in the Senate do not have the votes to get the legislation through without the tax package rider (as demonstrated last week when a “clean” wage hike failed on a procedural matter), it will be up to Majority Leader Reid and Speaker Pelosi to work out a compromise between the conflicting versions.
Once it has finished with the minimum wage legislation, the Senate will take up the debate over the president’s plan to send more troops to Iraq.
At this writing, it is unclear whether the Democrats have the votes needed to pass either of the two non-binding Iraq resolutions that have been introduced so far. While Sen. Warner’s (R-VA) dissent was significant given his stature, it has also provided moderate Republicans and conservative Democrats – including Sen. Ben Nelson (D-NE), who co-sponsored the Warner resolution – a middle option between standing with the president or voting for Senator Joe Biden’s (D-DE) resolution, stating that the troop increase is “not in the national interest.”
Majority Leader Reid last week told reporters that he will continue his efforts to try to merge the two resolutions – efforts that Warner rebuffed last week. In any event, Reid expressed confidence that an Iraq debate will favor Democrats, and that the prospect of the 2008 elections, in which Senate Republicans will be defending 21 seats to Democrats’ 12, will be a big factor in the decisions of many Republicans.
It was reported last week that Senator John McCain (R-AZ) is also working on his own resolution. No details have been released yet, but early reports indicated that McCain’s resolution would differ from the others by being supportive of the president’s plan but setting specific benchmarks that must be met by the Iraqi government in return for a stepped-up commitment of U.S. troops and resources.
The House is waiting for the Senate to move first on Iraq. It will devote most of its time this week to passing a Continuing Resolution (CR) to keep the government funded through the end of the year.
Staffers on the House and Senate appropriations committees worked through the weekend to put together the mammoth CR, an estimated $463.5 billion joint funding package that will cover 13 cabinet-level and smaller-level agencies.
The CR will fund most agencies and programs at “current levels” – that is, the level at which funding was appropriated last year. However, because the CR operates under the higher FY07 budget cap, there is room for increases in certain priority areas, such as veterans' benefits, health and education. Democrats pledged last year that the CR would not exclude all but necessary earmarks.
The House is expected to pass the measure Wednesday without a prolonged debate, but expect the Senate process to be more laborious.
On Tuesday, the Senate Armed Services Committee will consider the nomination of Admiral William Fallon to head U.S. Central Command. The nomination is expected to be approved.
|
Embryonic stem cell research in America is stymied by restrictive federal funding, which dangerously slows progress on critical medical cures. Federal funding can only be applied to research on 21 older stem cell lines, many of which are contaminated and unusable. Yet thousands of excess embryos that could be used to create more stem cell lines are discarded from fertility clinics every year. Congress is considering federal legislation this spring to expand the number of eligible lines; while the bill will likely pass Congress it is unclear if it will have enough votes to overturn President Bush’s expected veto. In the face of federal inaction, states are left to determine innovative ways to fund this research and carry the burden of assuring that America continues to compete with other nations in the race for life-saving cures.
