April 11, 2007: S. 5 (Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act of 2007 )

“A bill to amend the Public Health Service Act to provide for human embryonic stem cell research.”

Murkowski (R-AK), Yea

 http://senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=110&session=1&vote=00127

July 18, 2006: H.R. 810 (Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act of 2005 )

“A bill to amend the Public Health Service Act to provide for human embryonic stem cell research.”

Murkowski (R-AK), Yea

 http://senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=109&session=2&vote=00206

2006  – Mr. Coburn:

“So I think this really boils down to two questions: false choices and false promises. Let me outline them. The false promise is that only embryonic stem cells are going to solve the problem. It is not true.

The second promise is we are going to get treatments, but we are not going to have to clone. You are going to have to clone if you are going to get treatments from embryonic stem cells.

No. 3 is that adult stem cells and the pluripotent lines, as well as germ cell lines, will not be able to do what embryonic stem cells do. That is not proven anywhere in the scientific literature. That is a false promise.

And No. 4 is the false promise issue that you cannot take adult stem cells and dedifferentiate, move backwards, to make them pluripotent, which we are seeing great science with an enzyme today called reversa. So those are the false promises that are out there.

Now, there are four false choices, I believe. One is that there is no cure without embryonic stem cells. That, for sure, the evidence does not show. Another is that there will not be any research unless the Government pays for it. That is not true at all. The research is ongoing across the world in lots of areas without government research, and much more so in our country outside of government research.

The third choice is that there is no life in an embryo. The fact is there is. Now, we had one Senator talk about the fact that they are going to be incinerated. If you talk about the 108 snowflake babies, the other 2 or 3 organizations that are adopting those, those children belie that fact that there is wonderful potential with the amount of demand.

I am not saying that people who disagree with me on the ethical issues are bad or immoral people. I am saying I am not fighting this on ethical issues. I am fighting this on common sense, to see what things are happening and where we are seeing success and keeping up with the science. This debate in the Senate today is almost all about a year and a half old, as far as the science is concerned. I am talking about the new science. That is why I worked so hard to stay up on it.

Finally, the promise is what every scientist knows, what every embryologist knows and every cell biologist knows, which is the mighty mitochondria. You cannot clone without having potential rejections unless you clone yourself with your own egg. There is different DNA in the mitochondria and the cell cytoplasm. I appreciate the spirit of the debate, and I hope the American people understand that it is not a false choice of no research versus some. The question is, Do we destroy unborn children? Two, do we give Federal dollars to do that?”

2007  –

Mr. Coleman:

“Mr. President, as I listened to my distinguished colleague from North Dakota, there is so much we agree on. What we agree on is we want to move science forward. We want to provide hope to those who are suffering from diseases and conditions with the possibility of stem cell research. The issue is a matter of Federal funding. What do we put Federal dollars into? Should there be any moral questions that are raised before we make that decision to put Federal dollars into something? That is a legitimate issue to discuss in the Senate. It is a reflection of the reality that in this country there is substantial disagreement about what is appropriate use of Federal dollars. This is not about shutting off research. It is not about stopping research. It is not about a lack of research going on. We still lead the world in embryonic stem cell research. With forty percent of all the publications that are offered in this country, 85 percent of the dollars from what we have provided, both embryonic and adult stem cell research, we are leading the world.”

Mr. Brownback:

“Human embryos are being destroyed for research purposes and for stem cells. Some have referred to this as ``potential life,'' which strikes me as a bit like the debate we had on the issue of slavery, where we deemed a person three-fifths of a person at one point in time. That is a complete legal fiction. You are either a person or you are not. You are either life or you are not life. It is not potential life. Nowhere in the scientific literature is there a description of potential life. The embryo is a species at that stage of development in the life cycle. That is the scientific definition and information--the embryo is a species at that stage of development in the life cycle. We all have a life cycle. The embryo is the species at that stage. That is common sense. The embryo stage is a development stage, but it remains human life, not potential human life. It is alive and it is a life.”