The Stem Cell Merry-Go-Round

Here we go again. On stem cell research, that is.

The House is poised to pass what is essentially the same bill they passed in the last Congress, easing the restrictions on federal funding for embryonic stem cell research. There are even more votes for it this time than last, with the Democrats in control.

Then the bill will go to the Senate, where it will also pass.

Then it will go to the president, who will veto it.

Neither the House nor the Senate has the 2/3 majority necessary to override a presidential veto, and the bill will die.

So why go through the exercise?

Because the president is wrong. Because the research is important. Because change isn't easy.

George Bush is as out of touch with America on stem cell research as he is on the war in Iraq.

The latest news on stem cell research came last weekend with reports of promising work with amniotic stem cell, derived from pregnant women. What happened, predictably enough, was that opponents of the House bill seized on the new research findings to suggest that maybe it isn't necessary to do research on embryonic stem cells after all.

Not so fast.

"Some may be interpreting my research as a substitute for the need to pursue other forms of regenerative medicine therapies, such as those involving embryonic stem cells. I disagree with that assertion," wrote Anthony Atala of Wake Forest University, the author of the amniotic stem cell study, in a letter released by the sponsors of the House bill. It is "essential that National Institutes of Health-funded researchers are able to fully pursue embryonic stem cell research as a complement to research into other forms of stem cells."

In short, so what if White House spokesman Tony Snow is hinting that the president doesn't have a problem with research on amniotic fluid (what problem could he have, I'm afraid to ask…)? That's still no excuse for limiting other forms of stem cell research.

My friends who are activists in this area remember, in their early days, meeting with blank stares from Democratic leaders when they suggested that stem cell research could be a powerful political issue, even and especially in a presidential election.

No one looks at them blankly any more.

What Democrats have discovered, and not only in Missouri where Michael J. Fox's much-discussed advertisement helped decide the Senate race, is that this is one of the wedge issues of the 21st century, uniting Democrats and dividing Republicans, precisely because support does cross party lines. Anyone contemplating running for president needs a position on the issue, and for Republicans, taking a position to court favor with the religious right by opposing stem cell research means taking on the majority of all Americans on an issue they care about. Keeping the issue in the headlines keeps the pressure on.

George Bush used the only veto of his presidency to stop stem cell research. By all reports, he's ready to do it again, and will. That can't be stopped.

But progress can be made. This isn't just about scoring political points. It's more important than that.

This time, the bill will get more votes than last time. Next time, it will get more still. Forcing legislators to confront the question, and stand up and be counted, is one step on the way to making change happen. Every time the issue is raised, more people get educated, more people get involved, and the support for lifesaving research that comes at no loss of life to anyone grows.

And one of these days, we might actually have a president whose views reflect those of most Americans, a president who will actually sign the bill. Democracy is messy and slow, but ultimately it does tend to work. Republicans beware.

To find out more about Susan Estrich and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate website at www.creators.com.

COPYRIGHT 2007 CREATORS SYNDICATE INC.