Daily Kos

House Passes Stem Cell Bill

Thu Jan 11, 2007 at 02:42:27 PM PDT

Bush has already promised a veto, so the battle lines are drawn but this time reconfigured with the new Democratic majority in Congress. The legislation passed today bye a 253-174 vote would loosen restrictions on stem cell research (with 37 Republicans voting for it). Unfortunately, the House vote doesn't constitute a veto-proof margin, but a bipartisan group of legislators are coordinating across the House and Senate to steer the issue.

"This is not a 'one bill and you're out,' but a two-year time frame with potentially multiple legislative possibilities," said a research supporter involved in Capitol Hill strategizing, speaking on the condition of anonymity because he is not authorized to comment publicly.

"They can stretch it out," the strategist said, so Bush and his backers in Congress must keep saying no to research that the public says it strongly supports. The research advocates "can make it as painful as possible."

Congressional leaders driving the legislation say they hope to avoid all-out war. Compromise language "is welcome," Rep. Diana DeGette (D-Colo.) said Tuesday at a news briefing, conceding that Bush has rebuffed all entreaties so far.

But if it comes to war, members of Congress and aides from both parties said, supporters have many options not available to them last year. They range from subtle moves that could enhance the odds of overriding a veto to heavy-handed tactics such as attaching the bill to must-pass budget legislation.

"I'm confident we'll have a veto-proof bill this time," said Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.), one of three high-powered Republican supporters of stem cell research who attended the Tuesday briefing. In an odd Washington moment, all three seemed briefly grateful that the Democrats were back in charge.

Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa), who has led the stem cell charge in the Senate along with Specter, agreed. "One way or another, we're going to get this done this year," he said yesterday in a meeting with Washington Post editors and reporters.

The legislation (pdf) allows addtional stem cell lines; imposes ethical guidelines; contains reporting guidelines; and authorizes federal funds only for stem cells from embryos that fertility clinics would discard. Public opinion polling consistently supports this research and Democratic candidates featuring the issue in their campaigns in 2006 fared well. Expect to see more Republican defections as the issue plays out and Bush's political capital diminishes.

  • ::

Tags: 2007, House, stem cells (all tags) :: Previous Tag Versions

Permalink | 54 comments

  •  I agree (7+ / 0-)

    I also think it would be fine if once the veto and the override fails they pass it again and again and again.

    Sorry I have to run to the Senate floor to abolish torture.

    by bten on Thu Jan 11, 2007 at 02:41:23 PM PDT

  •  the legislation (18+ / 0-)

    coming out of the first 100 hours is just awesome. just awesome.

    lurking surreptitiously ask about Central PA Kossacks(-0.12, -3.33)

    by terrypinder on Thu Jan 11, 2007 at 02:42:26 PM PDT

    •  This is my message to President Bush (5+ / 0-)

      President Bush:

      If you carry forward with your promised veto of this critical legislation, which has now been passed twice by the people's house and which is supported by the overwhelming majority of Americans -- your employers -- I hope you will send me an explanation I can give to my niece.  Here she is:

      Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting

      She's lovely, isn't she?  And you would agree that she deserves a fair shot at life and health, right?  So please tell me why some discarded embryo is more important than she is.  Please give me the words to explain to her why she should have to endure yet another year of being stuck with needles 10 times a day.  Please tell me how I should tell her why she should continue to endure a shunt in her abdomen and hugely increased risks of heart disease and renal failure and amputation because she has juvenile diabetes.  Please give me a clue as to how to tell her that 15,000 needles aren't enough, because some discarded embryo matters more than she does.  I don't have these words. I have no explanation.  All I have is huge admiration for her courage in battling this insidious disease for all but one year of her short 16 years on this earth.  And so many tears for your utter heartlessness. How dare you say no to her, Mr. President.  How dare you?

      1-20-09 The Darkness Ends "Where cruelty exists, law does not." ~ Alberto Mora

      by noweasels on Thu Jan 11, 2007 at 07:03:04 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  The U.S. House Digest covered this today... (6+ / 0-)

    ... over at our blog. Full details on the legislation and some analysis of where it stands now at http://ushousedigest.wordpress.com

  •  This is how you play to win. (8+ / 0-)

    Make Bush and his Fundie WhackJob AssBuddies, Brownback are ya listening, tell the American people:

    No...

    No...

    No...

    And after a while the American people will get the message:

    Bush don't give a fuck about you.

    Or your sick relative...

    Or you sick child...

    He only cares about himself. And...

    His party The Party of Greed, Torture and Death don't care about you or your family either.

    Two years of this and the citizenry will realise they have to...

    Get rid of the Republican Party or die.

    'I'm writing as Nestor since scoop in it's awesome wisdom won't let me use my real screen name: A.Citizen'

    by Nestor Makhnow on Thu Jan 11, 2007 at 02:43:29 PM PDT

  •  How many (R) votes are needed for the 2/3rds? (1+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    TomP

    My stubby fingers can't do the math!

    :)

    ::::

    •  2/3 plus 1 of 435 is... (2+ / 0-)

      Recommended by:
      nowheredesign, TomP
      1.  That's assuming everyone votes.  There were 253 votes for it.  But, someone on TV said that only 2 votes had to be flipped in an override.  I'm confused.

      HotFlashReport - Opinionated liberal views of the wrongs of the right focusing on abortion and reproductive rights.

      by annrose on Thu Jan 11, 2007 at 03:01:20 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Don't Need the +1 (2+ / 0-)

        Recommended by:
        nowheredesign, DemocraticLuntz

        Veto overrides only require a straightforward two-thirds majority vote.  In the House, if everyone were to vote, 290-145 would be sufficient.  That being said, we're about three dozen short of that figure, so pretty much everyone realizes that the votes for an override just aren't there.  The situation is apparently somewhat different in the Senate, however, where folks like Sen. Harkin believe the stem-cell measure may have 69-70 votes behind it, possibly even more.

        So this could turn out to be the reverse of the minimum wage bill, with veto-proof majorities in one chamber but not the other.

        Can you smell the Constitution burning?

        by The Maven on Thu Jan 11, 2007 at 03:16:43 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  It can't have less than 66, (3+ / 0-)

          Recommended by:
          The Maven, annrose

          (including Tim Johnson) although that's admittedly not quite enough [his not being there doesn't have any effect on this particular vote since 66 out of 99 would be required without him there as opposed to 67 out of 100]
          It passed 63-37 last year.

          58 of those who voted YEA are still there (every Dem in the Senate except Ben Nelson as well as Lamar Alexander, Robert Bennett, Richard Burr, Thad Cochran, Susan Collins, Judd Gregg, Orrin Hatch, Kay Hutchison, Trent Lott, Richard Lugar, John McCain, Lisa Murkowski, Gordon Smith, Olympia Snowe, Arlen Specter, Ted Stevens and John Warner).

          Of the 10 new freshman Senators, 8 of them (every Democrat except Casey) will definitely be voting YEA.

          So the Senators to be pressured if it comes to it will be Bob Casey, Ben Nelson, and every Republican up for re-election in 2008 (especially Norm Coleman and John Sununu)

          •  I've Got to Believe (1+ / 0-)

            Recommended by:
            annrose

            Sens. Coleman and Sununu will switch their position and vote for S.5.  Their poltical careers could well be over if they fail to support the measure.  Frankly, I was shocked that Coleman didn't vote in favor last year, given the degree to which medical research is so important to Minnesota's economy.  But, hey, if they want to commit political suicide here, I'm all for it, since it will only make them even more vulnerable in 2008.

            And in a way, I kind of hope that someone does invoke Sen. Johnson, since there's a possibility that stem-cell research could help in the treatment of arteriovenous malformation.

            Can you smell the Constitution burning?

            by The Maven on Thu Jan 11, 2007 at 03:55:15 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  My blond cheerleader senator, (2+ / 0-)

              Recommended by:
              annrose, Phil N DeBlanc

              Kay Bailey Hutchinson.  Blech.  I hope she does vote against the bill, and I hope the people of Texas finally realize she's just an empty designer suit (which is the nicest thing I could call her).

              I would love to see the neighborhood around Baylor in Waco be the only Texas district she carries in her next election.

              "In this world of sin and sorrow there is always something to be thankful for; as for me, I rejoice that I am not a Republican." - H. L. Mencken

              by SueDe on Thu Jan 11, 2007 at 05:08:30 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  That $atanic Hosebeast (2+ / 0-)

                Recommended by:
                WhiteCenterLib, Phil N DeBlanc
                used to send me her bullshit form letters when I would write her on various topics. She is truly a worthless human being and at least as bad as anyone in the senate. I loved living in Austin so much, but having her as my senator was just depressing.

                Can we please find a strong senate candidate for TX?

                My wife's life depends on stem cell research. I am prepared to fully wage war on these fuck-o's.

                end corporate rule. restore democracy.

                by jaskot on Fri Jan 12, 2007 at 12:35:05 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

  •  I think 16. (0+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    Phil N DeBlanc

    Right?  51 Dems plus 16 Reps is 67, which is 2/3.

    And my son is counting on each and every one of them.

    John McCain wants to send women to back alleys. We're not going.

    by edsbrooklyn on Thu Jan 11, 2007 at 02:54:39 PM PDT

  •  I can't believe I'm actually writing 51 Dems! n/t (1+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    Phil N DeBlanc

    John McCain wants to send women to back alleys. We're not going.

    by edsbrooklyn on Thu Jan 11, 2007 at 02:55:43 PM PDT

  •  Amniotic Cells (8+ / 0-)

    The Republicans are scattering FUD around the recent announcement on amniotic stem cells to try and make embryonic cells seem unnecessary (and if you dip your toe into freeperland, you can see much crowing).  But the Democrats have in hand a letter from the author of the amniotic cell study, stating that embryonic cell research still needs to be pursued.

    •  Here's the excerpt from "Amniotic Atala" - (0+ / 0-)

      from same Washington Post article -

      On Stem Cell Legislation, a Reprise With Twists
      Passage, Veto Likely as Supporters Wield New Power and Foes Cite New Alternatives

      By Rick Weiss
      Washington Post Staff Writer

      Thursday, January 11, 2007; A04 ....

      But scientist after scientist said that, attractive as the new findings are, they remain preliminary and unconfirmed. Moreover, the work is eight years behind the progress already made with embryonic cells, which researchers hope to start testing in patients by next year.

      Even the scientist who led the amniotic cell study released a letter Tuesday warning against using his work as an excuse to vote against broader stem cell funding.

      "I understand that 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," Anthony Atala of Wake Forest University School of Medicine wrote in a letter to DeGette and co-sponsor Rep. Michael N. Castle (R-Del.). "I disagree with that assertion. . . . It is essential that National Institute[s] of Health-funded researchers are able to fully pursue embryonic stem cell research."

      It's all in the numbers - register voters for Obama, Today!

      by Blue Waters Run Deep on Thu Jan 11, 2007 at 09:45:08 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  How would (0+ / 0-)

    this help

    They range from subtle moves that could enhance the odds of overriding a veto to heavy-handed tactics such as attaching the bill to must-pass budget legislation.

    He'll just issue another signing statement making it null and void.

    [-6.25, -5.59] "The love you take is equal to the love you make." - J. Lennon, P. McCartney

    by Phil N DeBlanc on Thu Jan 11, 2007 at 03:00:42 PM PDT

    •  He can't issue a signing statement refusing (1+ / 0-)

      Recommended by:
      grayday101

      to enact part of a budget bill (according to Johnathan Turley).  And he isn't responsible for appropriating the money - the Appropriations Committee of the House does that.

      He could order the relevant agency not to issue any research grants, but I think he would be dragged out of the White House by an angry mob if he did that.

      "In this world of sin and sorrow there is always something to be thankful for; as for me, I rejoice that I am not a Republican." - H. L. Mencken

      by SueDe on Thu Jan 11, 2007 at 05:16:11 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Democrats who voted against it!! (6+ / 0-)

    You know what to do.  I hope Mme. Speaker knows what to do as well:

    Costello
    Davis, Lincoln
    Donnelly
    Ellsworth
    Kaptur
    Lipinski
    Marshall, Jim (GA)
    McIntyre
    Mollohan
    Oberstar
    Peterson (MN)
    Rahall
    Shuler, Heath (NC)
    Stupak
    Taylor
    Wilson (OH)

    HotFlashReport - Opinionated liberal views of the wrongs of the right focusing on abortion and reproductive rights.

    by annrose on Thu Jan 11, 2007 at 03:03:51 PM PDT

  •  Bush's Political Capital is in Baghdad. (1+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    Devilstower, Phil N DeBlanc

    huh. Double-entendre. I'm so funny. :)

  •  That's good news...I only wish it was (0+ / 0-)

    a veto-proof majority...but we can work with this...I'm glad they sound determined!

  •  In praise of the 100 Hour Plan (4+ / 0-)

    I know we all want, and need, to get on the track of exposing Bush's lies around the war.  It would be great if we could pop some popcorn and having nothing but 24/7 neocons on the hotseat, trying to explain their unmatched ability for lying and screweing up.  But at the moment I'm very glad that these bills are getting passed.  Even if they get vetoed, every one of them is simple proof that Democrats can get important legislation out the door.

    Start the hearings, but don't let them interfere with finishing off the list.

  •  Absolutely Infuriating (3+ / 0-)

    No issue makes me so mad as does the stem cell one.  There was NO reason to not vote for this bill.  One Republican lawmaker put it best when he said the choice is between medical waste and medical research.  If not researched, these embryos would be thrown out.  These people make me sick, especially the Democrats who voted against the bill.  They are denying millions of people who are suffering the simple idea of hope.

    It's cold hearted, but maybe Rahm made a good point when he said that perhaps those who vote against the bill shouldn't be allowed to reap the medical cures that may come from it.

  •  Threatens a veto (0+ / 0-)

    According to CNN,

    But the 253-174 vote fell short of the two-thirds margin required to overturn President Bush's promised veto, despite gains made by supporters in the November elections. Bush vetoed identical legislation last year and the White House on Thursday promised he would veto it again.

    (emphasis added)

    It's a threat, not a promise, unless you are talking to opponents of the bill. So you can see what audience CNN thinks it is addressing.

  •  From my son's doctor to your ears... (1+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    Blue Waters Run Deep

    At University of Miami last week, my son's spinal cord injury specialist told him: "Maybe now that we have a new government we can do something for you..." Unfortunately, his doctor is European and may not realize how hard it will be to override that veto. But with GREAT activism it might be done.

    There are only so many years when we can keep those muscles from atrophying. I spend three hours a day with him (before and after work and all lunch hour) working them out so he will be able to benefit from the treatment when it comes.

  •  Not veto-proof but close (0+ / 0-)

    Switching four votes would make it 257 to 170.  If my after-a-big-dinner math is right, that's a hair over two thirds.  

    What's the poop on what we can expect in the Senate?

    We're all pretty strange one way or another; some of us just hide it better. "Normal" is a dryer setting.

    by david78209 on Thu Jan 11, 2007 at 04:56:57 PM PDT

  •  An interesting aside (0+ / 0-)

    This line jumped out at me:

    In an odd Washington moment, all three [Republican senators] seemed briefly grateful that the Democrats were back in charge.

    Am I the only one who thinks the Republicans are, at this point, like a drug addict who is fully aware that he's out of control but can't stop himself, and is grateful to be involuntarily committed so that responsible people can keep him from hurting himself more?

    This isn't the first time I've gotten this feeling since the election, but this article certainly states it the best. It seems to me that a lot of Republicans are almost pathetically eager to work with the Democrats, now that they're finally back in the minority - as if they were grateful to finally be saved from themselves.

  •  Will all the political machinations (0+ / 0-)

    be done before every worthwhile scientific research team leaves this country?  Hopefully the scientists can hang on for a couple more years.

    "In this world of sin and sorrow there is always something to be thankful for; as for me, I rejoice that I am not a Republican." - H. L. Mencken

    by SueDe on Thu Jan 11, 2007 at 05:47:41 PM PDT

  •  The REAL reason Bush will veto (1+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    sacrelicious

    He doesn't care about a few barely visible cells in a petri dish that are due to be discarded -- give me a break!!
    If he cared about life so much, why would he keep sending healthy young adults to Iraq to be slaughtered and maimed for no purpose except his own pathological stubbornness?
    And he obviously doesn't care about the millions of people, from kids to elderly, with agonizing chronic diseases or paralysis.  
    No, what Bush cares about are the wealthy interests who fund Republic campaigns and own Republic public officials:  the pharmaceutical companies!
    Once stem cell researchers come up with treatments to CURE diseases, the drug companies' profits will go into severe remission.  People won't have to take their expensive pills for decades anymore in order to keep living.
    P.S.  I heard CNN News use "Democrat" as an adjective today.  So as a wordsmith, I'm now going to use "Republic" as an adjective instead of Republican.

  •  Math People (0+ / 0-)

    To overide the veto it would take

    282 - 145

    66.04%

    http://www.Impeachgonzales.com/ Impeach Gonzales

    by PreteFunkEra on Thu Jan 11, 2007 at 07:34:40 PM PDT

  •  related diary posted *here* - (0+ / 0-)

    It's all in the numbers - register voters for Obama, Today!

    by Blue Waters Run Deep on Thu Jan 11, 2007 at 09:32:33 PM PDT

  •  Bush still has political capital? (1+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    Blue Waters Run Deep

    news to me.

    Great post; good to hear this still has a chance.

    John McCain: The only mavericky straight-talker surrounded by corporate lobbyists

    by atrexler on Thu Jan 11, 2007 at 09:52:38 PM PDT

  •  Why, oh why... (0+ / 0-)

    I do not understand why these silly, foolish people on the far right cannot see the brunt of this argument.  We have only two options with these stem cells:

    1. Use them for valuable, cutting edge, world-changing research.

    OR

    1. Throw them in the trash.

    The Democrats need to frame it in this context each and every time.  They should set the tone on this debate.  Ask every Congressman voting against it, "Why do you want to throw these stem cells in the trash?"

    It's pathological.  They're friggin' insane.  The 29%ers are insane, or are ignorant of the fact that these stem cells are going to get thrown in the trash!  

    For a group that considers these embryos to be unborn babies, they sure do like to throw babies in the trash, don't they?

    •  I agree! (0+ / 0-)

      I can't figure it out, either. Am I missing something? Seems to me there are two options:
      either do the research or throw the embryos away. How in the world can these people actually prefer throwing them away?? If they think that the research destroys human life, what does throwing them away do? Preserve life?? I like the "Medical Research or Medical Waste" frame.

Permalink | 54 comments