House Falls Short Of Veto-Proof Margin In Stem Cell Vote

WASHINGTON — The House voted Thursday to lift President Bush's ban on federally funded research involving embryonic stem cells, but fell far short of the 290 votes it would need to override a promised veto.

The vote was 253-174, only 15 more votes than the measure got last year and 37 fewer than the two-thirds majority needed for a veto override.

The White House immediately announced that Bush, who made an identical bill last year the subject of his only presidential veto, views it as an effort to "use federal taxpayer dollars to support and encourage the destruction of human life."

The statement contained the underlined sentence: "If H.R. 3 were presented to the president, he would veto the bill."

The House bill, and an identical Senate measure, would permit federally financed research on embryonic stem cells left over from in-vitro fertilization procedures and slated for destruction.

The donors of the cells would have to specifically authorize their use in research.

Although other types of stem cells are being used in research and some therapies, many scientists say that embryonic stem cells hold the greatest promise for finding cures for many diseases, including cancer, Parkinson's disease, diabetes and treatments for paralyzing nerve injuries.

Embryonic cells have the potential to become any of the more than 220 types of cells in the human body.

Shortly after taking office in 2001, Bush restricted federal embryonic stem cell research to about 20 lines of cells that already were being used for that purpose.

Those existing lines have been found unsuitable, scientists say, because they are contaminated with material from animal tissues in which they are grown. Many scientists want to begin research on hundreds of other lines that have been gathered from fertility clinics.

Such research is permissible if funded privately, but the bills before Congress would allow a much broader effort.

The House bill, sponsored by Rep. Diana DeGette, D-Colo., and Mike Castle, R-Del., came up for a floor vote without committee action as part of the "first 100 hours" agenda of House Democrats.

During less than four hours of debate, opponents and supporters took turns praising and condemning use of federal funds for research on several thousand frozen and unused embryos being kept in fertilization clinics.

Rep. Phil Gingrey, R-Ga., a obstetrician-gynecologist, said the use of frozen embryos slated for destruction for research would be like taking "organs from death row prisoners because they are going to die anyway."

"I know we don't have to sacrifice human life in order to research ways to save it," said Gingrey, who has introduced another bill to encourage research on stem cells found in the amniotic fluid that surrounds a developing fetus.

Rep. Lloyd Doggett, D-Texas, said that "scientists call them stem cells, but they are really cells of hope."

California has set up a state program to fund stem cell research and several other states are considering similar moves.

Rep. Joe Barton, R-Texas, who broke with Republican leaders and supported the bill last year, said he was in favor of it because "I am pro-life."

He noted that his two stem-cell votes last year — to pass the bill and in the failed effort to override the president's veto — were the only votes he has made in over 20 years in Congress that were counted as "bad votes" by anti-abortion organizations.

"The choice is pro-research or pro-medical waste," Barton said, noting that the cells will be destroyed if not used by scientists.

"Which is the most pro-life?" he asked.

Freshman Rep. Ron Klein, D-Fla., who defeated veteran Republican Rep. Clay Shaw last year, said many of his older constituents in West Palm Beach, Boca Raton and Fort Lauderdale face diseases of aging that may someday be cured because of stem cell research.

Shaw was one of several moderate Republicans who had voted in favor of the bill last year but were defeated by Democrats. That appeared to account in part for the fact that the 30-seat gain House Democrats made in the fall elections did not translate into 30 additional votes for the bill.

Rep. John Linder, R-Ga., insisting that he was "not comparing anybody to Hitler," asked if proponents of the bill had a "hidden agenda" to desensitize Americans to the value of human life.

He said the first people exterminated in Nazi Germany were crippled children who had been cared for by Catholic nuns. The next, he said, were crippled veterans of World War I.

"When they started exterminating Jews, the German people had been "desensitized and accepted it."

"Is that what we are doing here today?" he asked.