 |
 |
Conservative Pressure for Stem Cell Funds Builds Key Antiabortionists Join Push for Embryo Research By Ceci Connolly Washington Post Staff Writer Monday, July 2, 2001; Page A01 President Bush, nearing a decision on whether to fund controversial medical research using cells obtained from human embryos, is under increasing pressure from prominent conservative Republicans who argue it is possible to be both "pro-life" and "pro-stem cell." In an unlikely twist, some of the same leaders who have consistently championed the antiabortion cause in America are now in the vanguard of a new political force. "Stem cell research facilitates life," said Sen. Orrin G. Hatch (R-Utah), who studied the issue for two years before deciding to aggressively lobby the Bush administration. "Abortion destroys life; this is about saving lives." Within the next few weeks, Bush is expected to decide whether to allow scientists to use federal money for stem cell research. In a draft report circulated last week, scientists from the National Institutes of Health enthusiastically described the potential of the cells. These tiny cells are typically obtained from early embryos that are discarded at fertility clinics. Because embryonic cells can develop into brain cells, liver cells and heart muscle cells, scientists say the work could lead to breakthroughs on such diseases as Alzheimer's, Parkinson's and diabetes. One group estimates that 100 million people suffer from conditions that could be aided through stem cell developments. Catholic leaders and many antiabortion activists are waging a fierce campaign to prevent federally funded research. They argue that any work on embryos -- even those about to be discarded at fertility clinics -- is tantamount to the taking of a life. "The idea that someone may otherwise be discarding the embryo anyway is not relevant to the moral question for our government," said Richard Doerflinger, an official with the National Conference of Catholic Bishops. "Destroying an embryo in the lab is morally the same as abortion in Catholic teaching." Contrary to the perception that the stem cell debate is merely the latest chapter in this nation's long argument over abortion, leaders such as Hatch and former senator Connie Mack are proving that the political and ethical calculus is far more complex. "The most pro-life position would be to help people who suffer from these maladies," Hatch said in an interview. "That is far more ethical than just abandoning or discarding these embryonic stem cells." For politicians such as Hatch, a Mormon, the decision to break with many of their allies in the antiabortion community was closely tied to the enormous medical potential of embryonic stem cells to treat a wide range of debilitating conditions. "I am just as pro-life today as I was before I had any knowledge of stem cells," said Mack, a Florida Republican with close ties to Bush. A Roman Catholic and cancer survivor, Mack holds firm to the view that life begins at conception. But until recently, he said, "we didn't imagine that an egg could be fertilized outside the uterus in a petri dish or test tube." His beliefs have not changed, he explained, but they have evolved to take into account new scientific discoveries. In a 12-page memo to the administration, Hatch detailed his antiabortion credentials: author of a constitutional amendment allowing states to outlaw abortion, co-sponsor of the "Unborn Victims of Violence" bill and reliable vote against federal support for abortion. Hatch is hardly alone. In recent days, letters from the moderate House Republican Main Street Coalition, Sen. Zell Miller, a conservative Georgia Democrat, and 38 House Republicans have streamed into the White House. The growing antiabortion, pro-stem cell contingent includes Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham (R-Calif.) and Sens. Strom Thurmond (R-S.C.) and Gordon Smith (R-Ore.). Advocates of embryonic stem cell research have found a warm reception at the Department of Health and Human Services, where secretary Tommy G. Thompson, an antiabortion Catholic, has made clear his sympathies. But Thompson has also stressed that he is not the final arbiter, so several lawmakers have made personal appeals to Vice President Cheney, White House Chief of Staff Andrew H. Card Jr. and senior adviser Karl Rove. According to two administration sources, Rove has become a major hurdle in the process, fearful that supporting stem cell experiments will alienate the crucial Catholic vote -- just as Bush prepares to visit Pope John Paul II. Moderate Republicans such as Rep. Constance A. Morella counter that the church hierarchy is not the same as rank-and-file Catholics. A survey in her suburban Maryland district, along with national polls conducted by ABC News and the Wall Street Journal, found overwhelming support for the research, even among a majority of Catholics. At one time, Bush's team had hoped to scuttle Clinton administration plans to support stem cell research quietly. But with the scientific community, politicians and patients' rights groups touting the life-saving potential of stem cells, Bush's decision is drawing more attention, not less. "We are spending a great deal of time studying not only the science, but the ethical dimensions of this," a Bush strategist said. Although many in the White House are impressed by the scientific data, there is also great anxiety over the potential for "ethical precedents we can't even anticipate," this source said. Some in the administration are searching for a compromise that could include investing more heavily in research on stem cells obtained from adults, which do not require the destruction of embryos. Another option would be to fund work on embryonic stem cell lines that have already been harvested. Unlike so many Washington debates, the future of embryonic stem cells is an emotional, often personal, one. "This is an issue that touches people's lives very directly and very personally," Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) said she told Rove in a White House meeting. "It would be a mistake for the president to put himself in a position where his decision might be interpreted as insensitive to the suffering of families who have endured these devastating diseases." Members of the Juvenile Diabetes Foundation have patrolled the halls of Congress and met recently with Cheney to plead for funding. Twice in recent weeks, they have also flooded the White House telephone lines in a bid for Bush's assistance. And Hatch said yesterday that stem cell supporters are nearing the 60 votes in the Senate that would prevent a filibuster. For some, such as Mack and Miller, a direct experience with a debilitating disease has influenced their thinking. "I, too, have struggled with this issue," said Miller, who described in a letter to Bush the pain in watching "family members struggle with diabetes and other conditions that could greatly benefit from stem cell research." Mack began delving into science 13 years ago as cancer struck several family members. From a public policy perspective, the issue of fetal tissue research presented "the first time two fundamental principles were in conflict," he recalled. Two factors have been critical to his analysis: the life-saving potential of medical research and the knowledge that in most instances, these embryos would be destroyed regardless. During the campaign and in a recent letter to the antiabortion Culture of Life Foundation, Bush spoke against "federal funding for stem cell research that involves destroying living human embryos." But because scientists would not necessarily be engaged in the destruction of embryos, just the use of them, some stem cell advocates believe Bush has maneuvering room. GOP pollster Linda DiVall said Bush risks aggravating abortion opponents, but he "would be given credit for wrestling with the moral implications of this and understanding that while many people are conflicted, they want to see lives saved in the future." Though the road has been difficult, people such as Mack and Hatch say once they reached a conclusion in support of stem cell research, it seemed there was no other choice. As Hatch put it: "Why shouldn't we use these cells for the benefit of mankind?" http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A6571-2001Jul1.html * * * ---------------------------------------------------------------------- To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: mailto:[log in to unmask] In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn