Profession

Election 2006: No veto-proof majority on stem cell funding

Candidates favoring embryo research won, but not in large enough numbers. Missouri voted to keep the research legal.

By Kevin B. O’Reilly — Posted Nov. 27, 2006

Print  |   Email  |   Respond  |   Reprints  |   Like Facebook  |   Share Twitter  |   Tweet Linkedin

The November elections did not produce veto-proof congressional majorities in favor of expanded federal funding for research involving embryonic stem cells, but research supporters took heart from a pair of victories in the bellwether state of Missouri.

Actor Michael J. Fox, who has Parkinson's disease, barnstormed in support of pro-research candidates. The goal was to get enough votes in Congress to overcome a potential repeat of last July when President Bush vetoed a bill to expand funding for stem cell research using embryos left from in vitro fertilization treatments.

Though Democrats won control of Congress for the first time since 1994 and promised to pursue the issue, it appears the House will fall about 30 votes shy of a veto-proof roll call, according to James Fossett, PhD, co-director of the Federalism and Bioethics Initiative at the Alden March Bioethics Institute in Albany, N.Y.

"It's the states that are going to continue to spend the money and take the initiative," Dr. Fossett said. New York Gov.-elect Eliot Spitzer, a Democrat, pledged to spend $1 billion on stem cell research, and newly re-elected Democratic Wisconsin Gov. Jim Doyle will push ahead with plans to spend nearly $500 million to make the state a magnet for scientists.

Sean B. Tipton, president of the Coalition for the Advancement of Medical Research, of which the AMA is a member, said he hopes advances can be made in Bush's last years in office. "Americans took their feelings about embryonic stem cell research to the polls," Tipton said, referring to the two-thirds support for the research found in opinion surveys.

Both sides in the stem cell debate viewed the election in Missouri, which has picked the winning presidential candidate since 1900, as a Rorschach test of the national mood. A bare majority of voters there -- 51% to 49% -- passed Amendment 2 to allow scientists to conduct any research permitted under federal law and ban human cloning for reproductive purposes. They also favored, by a similarly slim margin, pro-research Democrat Claire McCaskill over incumbent Republican Sen. Jim Talent, who voted against the vetoed bill and opposed Amendment 2.

The close vote on Amendment 2 was a surprise because pro-research forces outspent opponents by a margin of 10 to 1. Opponents said the measure would make Missouri the "Clone Me State," arguing it misled voters by claiming to ban human cloning while allowing therapeutic cloning via somatic cell nuclear transfer.

"If there had been more time to educate Missourians about what the amendment really said, it would have gone down in defeat," said Russell B. Dieterich, MD, a retired St. Charles, Mo., ob-gyn who chaired a Christian Medical & Dental Assns. task force.

William H. Danforth, MD, chancellor emeritus of St. Louis' Washington University, said opponents of the measure tried to confuse voters into thinking it would legalize reproductive cloning. "This is an issue that has to do with religious convictions and religious identity, but it's also an issue of fact," he said.

The Missouri State Medical Assn. endorsed Amendment 2 and was a member of the pro-research Missouri Coalition for Lifesaving Cures. The AMA first adopted policy in favor of embryonic stem cell research in 1999, and EVP and CEO Michael D. Maves, MD, MBA, sent a letter to the Senate last summer in support of the bill ultimately vetoed by President Bush.

Back to top


ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

Voters speak

Nov. 7 was a good night for embryonic stem cell research supporters.

U.S. Senate races: Maryland, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, New Jersey, Ohio and Virginia elected Democratic candidates who spoke out in favor of embryonic stem cell research. Four of these seats represent a change in position from the previous officeholder.

U.S. House races: About 20 supporters of embryonic stem cell research funding were added.

Gubernatorial races: Connecticut, Illinois, Iowa, Michigan, New York and Wisconsin voters elected or re-elected gubernatorial candidates who have supported state funding for embryonic stem cell research.

Sources: Gail Pressberg; James Fossett, PhD

Back to top


ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISE HERE


Featured
Read story

Confronting bias against obese patients

Medical educators are starting to raise awareness about how weight-related stigma can impair patient-physician communication and the treatment of obesity. Read story


Read story

Goodbye

American Medical News is ceasing publication after 55 years of serving physicians by keeping them informed of their rapidly changing profession. Read story


Read story

Policing medical practice employees after work

Doctors can try to regulate staff actions outside the office, but they must watch what they try to stamp out and how they do it. Read story


Read story

Diabetes prevention: Set on a course for lifestyle change

The YMCA's evidence-based program is helping prediabetic patients eat right, get active and lose weight. Read story


Read story

Medicaid's muddled preventive care picture

The health system reform law promises no-cost coverage of a lengthy list of screenings and other prevention services, but some beneficiaries still might miss out. Read story


Read story

How to get tax breaks for your medical practice

Federal, state and local governments offer doctors incentives because practices are recognized as economic engines. But physicians must know how and where to find them. Read story


Read story

Advance pay ACOs: A down payment on Medicare's future

Accountable care organizations that pay doctors up-front bring practice improvements, but it's unclear yet if program actuaries will see a return on investment. Read story


Read story

Physician liability: Your team, your legal risk

When health care team members drop the ball, it's often doctors who end up in court. How can physicians improve such care and avoid risks? Read story

  • Stay informed
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • RSS
  • LinkedIn