Thanks to the Diary Rescue Squad, I came across Jeffrey Feldman's excellent diary
Frameshop: Lamont Is About Principles--DC Doesn't Get It which, as SusanG eloquently put it, "discusses how the Lamont campaign has been about principles, not issues, and how this can provide a framework for other successful Democratic campaigns."
Like others across the country, I've been volunteering my time here in Georgia to help another candidate who stands on principle, Steve Sinton.
Here's one area where the importance of Principles versus Issues applies to the campaign I'm actively supporting: Stem Cell Research.
As indicated on Steve's Campaign Website (which will undergo a major overhaul in 2 weeks), Steve is an active supporter of broad and inclusive stem cell research.
Steve says:
I'll promote the vigorous pursuit of stem cell research. We have the technology to improve medical outcomes in this country. We raise money for research of many diseases, and I struggle to understand why, when we have a medically proven approach to curing people, our government fights it? Why aren't we taking advantage all of our medical resources?
Steve is a Democrat who stands on principles, and his principles forge his positions on specific issues. Steve understands that the core principle of government in America is that our leaders rule not for, not with, not instead of -- but at the election of the people. On the issue of stem cell research, which Americans overwhelmingly support (by a 2 to 1 margin), the importance of governance based upon principles, not issues, becomes especially clear. ABC News Poll
I believe that Steve embodies the concepts best expressed by Thomas Jefferson, in his first inaugural speech (and the basis for Jeffrey Feldman's Diary. There, President Jefferson said the folowing -- and note how many times he uses the word "principle":
About to enter, fellow-citizens, on the exercise of duties which comprehend everything dear and valuable to you, it is proper you should understand what I deem the essential principles of our Government, and consequently those which ought to shape its Administration. I will compress them within the narrowest compass they will bear, stating the general principle, but not all its limitations. Equal and exact justice to all men, of whatever state or persuasion, religious or political; peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations, entangling alliances with none; the support of the State governments in all their rights, as the most competent administrations for our domestic concerns and the surest bulwarks against antirepublican tendencies; the preservation of the General Government in its whole constitutional vigor, as the sheet anchor of our peace at home and safety abroad; a jealous care of the right of election by the people -- a mild and safe corrective of abuses which are lopped by the sword of revolution where peaceable remedies are unprovided; absolute acquiescence in the decisions of the majority, the vital principle of republics, from which is no appeal but to force, the vital principle and immediate parent of despotism; a well-disciplined militia, our best reliance in peace and for the first moments of war till regulars may relieve them; the supremacy of the civil over the military authority; economy in the public expense, that labor may be lightly burthened; the honest payment of our debts and sacred preservation of the public faith; encouragement of agriculture, and of commerce as its handmaid; the diffusion of information and arraignment of all abuses at the bar of the public reason; freedom of religion; freedom of the press, and freedom of person under the protection of the habeas corpus, and trial by juries impartially selected. These principles form the bright constellation which has gone before us and guided our steps through an age of revolution and reformation. The wisdom of our sages and blood of our heroes have been devoted to their attainment.
link
Steve's opponent, Tom Price, is a first-term congressman and former orthapedic surgeon who has been surprisingly vocal in his opposition to stem cell research. On this issue, he has aligned himself with other fringe Georgia Republicans like Reps. Phil Gingrey and Lynn Westmoreland, who also were so vehemently outspoken in connection with the Terri Schiavo debacle. Price's statements in the Congressional Record speak volumes about his lack of principles.
In debate over the Stem Cell Therapeutic and Research Act of 2005, Mr. Price made the following statement regarding stem cell research:
What we are doing with this legislation is that we are celebrating life and we are celebrating science. Our debate today and this bill, this bill is so very important because it is not often that politicians get it right when dealing with health care or science. I know. As a physician I have seen government inject itself in places it ought not go and spend countless dollars on fanciful and distorted claims. However, H.R. 2520
will save lives and improve the quality of life for millions. And I know this because it will increase the use of a science that has already been proven.
As a new Member of Congress, I am proud to stand before you and lend my support to a positive and productive piece of legislation that will bring
sunlight to those who have experienced too many clouds, and it will do so in an unquestionable and ethical manner.
(House of Representatives - May 24, 2005) [Page: H3805]
Price clearly recognizes and understands the scientific benefits of stem cell research, but makes the coded logical fallacy that embryonic stem cell research posits a choice between "life" or "science." Price's cognitive dissonance presented itself full-bore in the discussion over the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act of 2005 later on that same day.
There, Mr. Price concluded:
Stem cell research and treatment of disease should actively proceed with those adult and cord stem cells that are providing and will increasingly provide excellent and exciting cures for patients in need.
Price voted no on the bill.
Price, Bush, Karl Rove and others peddle the falsehood that adult stem cells show more promise than embryonic stem cells. However, adult stem cells have "markedly restricted differentiation potential" and thus do not show the promise that Price, President Bush and others suggest. Letter from 80 Nobel laureates to President Bush
Just prior to Bush's veto of SB 810, the Chicago Tribune contacted a dozen top stem cell experts about Karl Rove's claim that "recent studies" supported the assertion that adult stem cells are the key. They all said it was inaccurate. So who wrote the "studies" that Rove was referring to?
White House spokesman Ken Lisaius on Tuesday could not provide the name of a stem cell researcher who shares Rove's views on the superior promise of adult stem cells.
Chicago Tribune Story
This and other recent stem cell news has been chronicled by the Expert Team at Think Progress, and I recommend and publicly crib here their good work.
Steve understands that the stem cell lines currently held by the government are contaminated and unusable and that there is a real need to support new research now, as detailed in this CNN Piece.
And, Steve will continue to highlight the logical fallacy that stem cell research presents a choice between science and ethics. H.R. 810 advances ethical guidelines on stem cell research "tighter than those under the President's policy, specifically when it comes to requiring the individuals seeking fertility treatment to provide written informed consent when donating their surplus embryos." See Parkinsons Action Network.
Steve will join the fight against those who falsely claim that stem cell research equates to federally funded killing of human life. Steve supports the precept of HR 810, which limits maintains the federal ban on federal funding for destruction of human embryos and limits research to embroyonic stem cells that were "created for the purposes of in vitro fertilization...which are spare or in excess of clinical need and in every single case are slated for medical waste." Text of Mike Castle's Letter to President Bush on HR 810.
Tom Price's statements in connection with the House debate over Senate bill (S. 686) "for the relief of the parents of Theresa Marie Schiavo" are illustrative of how he has so quickly abandoned his principles -- if he ever had any -- for political expediency.
Price voted for the federal government to intercede in the Schiavos' personal situation, and joined his Republican colleagues in providing a chamber-floor medical diagnosis. In so doing, Price stated that Congress has the power to supplant the courts, and equated the Schiavos' situation with a death penalty case.
Astounding.
He said:
There have been a lot of charges talked about tonight and a lot of emotion. This is a painful process. As a physician, I have dealt with end-of-life decisions in families as they struggle countless times. Why is this one different? First and foremost, there is no living will in place; and, second, there is a fundamental disagreement between Terri's husband and her parents, two who normally would agree. There is also a disagreement among medical experts.
Now, where do we make disagreements when there are disagreements with irreversible life-changing decisions? A court of law. What court? Depends on the case. Does Congress have the authority? Absolutely. Article I, Section 8 and Article III, section 1 give Congress the authority to determine the jurisdiction of Federal courts, and that is what we are doing here tonight.
Ideally, decisions are made among families. When loved ones disagree, our society strongly, strongly believes in individual rights and that they must be preserved. That is why all State death penalty cases get a final review in Federal court, and that is all that is being asked here.
(House of Representatives, March 20, 2005)[Page: H1716]
By rejecting stem cell research and taking part in the cynical political circus surrounding a terminally ill private citizen, Mr. Price has abandoned the principles of the medical profession found in the Hippocratic Oath, which instructs physicians to "respect the hard-won scientific gains of those physicians in whose steps [they] walk," "avoid[] those twin traps of overtreatment and therapeutic nihilism" and "prevent disease whenever [they] can, for prevention is preferable to cure." Modern Hippocratic Oath
Please help Steve Sinton can make a difference for the 6th District of Georgia and the country by lending support to his common sense and principled approach toward the "vigorous pursuit" of stem cell research.
Change Congress Now
Steve's ActBlue Page