And You Thought One Vote Didn’t Matter: The Stem Cell Battle

In U.S. lawmaking, the majority doesn’t always rule - even when there is public consensus behind the issue (especially if Congress and The White House are run by different parties). Surprised? Take a look at the stem cell debate.

After the November 2006 elections, Congress went to the Democrats, potentially putting the executive branch at odds with the legislative one. If President Bush doesn’t like what the Democrats are doing in Congress, he can always use his veto power. Then, the Democrats have to recruit some Republicans to override his veto.

The stem cell debate is a perfect example. Although the majority of Congress -- and the majority of Americans -- wants to overturn President Bush’s 2001 ban on federal funding for new stem cell lines, Bush has promised to veto any bill that would do so.

Presidents don’t normally like to veto legislation with broad support because of the political price that they and their party pay (especially if a presidential election is coming up.) Click here to learn more from WomenMatter’s interview with expert Thomas Mann.

"A determined country and Congress can eventually sort of force a change, and a president who's just determined to push ahead against that is going to pay a political price, and his party will pay a political price. And therefore you can be sure that Republican members of Congress, in the House and the Senate, will be visiting the White House demanding change as much, if not more, than the Democrats, as time goes on." - Thomas Mann on WomenMatter Radio, Committee Watch Radio Show.

And there’s reason to believe President Bush: a similar stem cell bill was the only bill he’s vetoed during his presidency. So, Democrats are trying to round up a two-thirds majority in the Senate (where the bill originated) in order to override him.

They are one vote - yes, one vote - short. They need 67 votes to override the veto and have, you guessed it, 66.

Two Democrats, Ben Nelson of Nebraska and Bob Casey of Pennsylvania, are firmly against the measure and, so far, not willing to override a veto. Republican John E. Sununu of New Hampshire is another potential swing vote, but so far he hasn’t budged.

Those in favor of the bill remain hopeful. They say it’s only a matter of time before somebody changes his or her mind. There is a fair amount of political pressure to support stem cell research, since most Americans are behind it, and Bob Casey and John Sununu are feeling the majority of that stress.

And adding to the pressure on possible swing senators are recent comments by the administration's chief scientist, National Institutes of Health Director Elias Zerhouni. On March 19, Zerhouni essentially broke with the administration, saying that access to new lines of embryonic stem cells would benefit science and the country. At issue is the importance of knowing, paying attention to, & reminding our reps about the science - as well as the politics.

What is stem cell research?

Stem cell research is relatively new; only since 1998 have scientists been able to grow and isolate stem cells, which have the unique potential to develop into many different kinds of cells all over the body.

When a stem cell divides, each "daughter" cell has the potential to either remain a stem cell or become another type of cell with a more specialized function. Stem cells, therefore, could serve as a repair system for tissues and organs, replenishing damaged or diseased cells, including red blood cells, brain cells, or muscle cells. And they have the potential to cure life-threatening diseases, including Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s.

Harvesting stem cells always kills the days-old embryos, making the practice controversial. The argument over stem cell research often mimics the abortion debate, centering on religious definitions about when human life begins.

But not all stem cells are derived from embryos. Umbilical cord stem cells are adult cells that originate in the mother, and they are proving in early research to be useful in treatments.

What would the bill do?

The bill would overturn President Bush’s 2001 executive order prohibiting federal funding for the creation of new stem cell lines. It would allow scientists to utilize leftover embryos that would otherwise be discarded.

Proponents argue that the life or death of the embryo has already been settled, and with the consent of the parents, its cells could be used in the pursuit of preserving life. But opponents say that it’s unethical to use embryos for scientific research. They consider frozen embryos to be individuals who need protection. Further, they say it’s unfair to require taxpayers to support something they disagree with.

Since legislators on both sides of the argument consider themselves pro-life, the term takes on a new meaning within the context of the stem cell debate. For example Senator Orrin Hatch (R- Utah) is strongly opposed to abortion, but since stem cell research may save lives, Hatch believes that it follows pro-life principles.

What do you think?

Should President Bush veto a policy that polls say is popular? Should Congress override it? Do your representatives know what you think?

Discuss your views with other WomenMatter readers on our blog.

Talk to your representatives! Weigh in with what you now know:

About WomenMatter

WomenMatter is a place to discuss life issues with other women. We don't want to wedge women apart, but rather bring them together to dialogue.

WomenMatter is the place where we can take one issue at a time, match what we do about it every day of our lives to the facts of the bigger system that we all live in and recognize that every idea for making it better has tradeoffs.

WomenMatter is dedicated to engaging women in the political process. To do this we have invested in the most in-depth NONPARTISAN information, because we trust each woman to make up her own mind.

• We track nine issues every week and update this website several times a week.
• We do continuous research to make sure that we are meeting the needs of women across the country of all ages, races, incomes, preferences, and religions.
• To explore our archive of past Women's Rights Life Issue updates, click here.