senate will come to order the chaplain dr barry black will lead the sat it in prayer let us pray god of all life we seek you in a world filled with challenges and problems prepare the members of this body for the rigors of solving life's riddles today give them the wisdom to seek common opportunities to accomplish your divine will and world make them instruments of your love in the midst of hatred and strife teach them to spend and be spent for the good of others lord we intercede for them give them the spiritual tools for strength of thought lightness of heart sincere in of conviction and clarity of purpose renewed their commitment to you as their inspiration their strength their courage their guide please join me in the pledge of allegiance to the flag i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the recall which is standing one nation under god indivisible with liberty and justice  to the senate washington d c april eleventh two thousand and seven to the senate under the provisions of rule one paragraph three of the standing rules of the senate i hereby appoint the honorable benjamin l carden a senator from the state of maryland to perform the shortly let me just mention that the vote is likely to be moved from five forty five to five fifty five the information of all senators and we have  structured order for debate for the balance of the afternoon and the morning after and it's already been been agreed to previous order the senate shall resume consideration of the following measures and block which the clerk will report the counter number three s five a bill to amend the public health service act to provide for human embryonic stem cell research s thirty a bill to intensify research to or to derive human pluripotent stem cell lines the previous order there is now ninety minutes of debate on the control of the senator from iowa mr harkin where is designee forty five minutes under control the senator from minnesota mr coleman and the senator from georgia is dr dixon and forty five minutes under control the senator from kansas mr brown back to all day and will have two votes later today at a time to be determined by the leaders but i think prior right prior to six p m the first vote occurring on s five and up or down vote without amendments and after that would  down vote on s thirty without the members i intend to take some time this morning after the senator from massachusetts speaks again to outline the differences in the two bills y y s five is a preferable bail and why that should be the bill that we pass and send to the president for his signature and to point out that s five is truly the compromise bill i want everyone to know is if there was some talk that s thirty should be the compromise well again let me point out for clarity that last year we passed the stem cell research bill there was another veil offered on the floor at the same time called the that bill was supported by the bush administration well both bills passed but the specter of santorum building ever made it through the house and therefore the president was given the the stem cell research that he exercised the only veto of his administration to veto the stem cell bill in order to reach out a hand of compromise to the white house we then incorporated in our veil s five today the specter santorum bill of last year was just part of s why so it seems to me we have gone halfway at least and reaching out to the white house to provide a compromise situation on the white house says they want to compromise they want something else well you know you can keep this up until there's nothing left of the  very clear that we have compromise we have come halfway we incorporated the bill last year that the president supported so that s five really is the compromise measure that we're sending to the president  this afternoon about the votes here in the united states senate and i welcome just a few moments to express my own views about where i think we are and what i think the issues really are of before the before the senate  for years mr president many of us have fought the same battle the battle to give those suffering or injured every ethical option for new cures for those speaking on the senate floor perhaps little changes from one years today to the next we still speak of hope we still speak of dreams denied when those hopes are dashed we still speak of our belief belief that medical research should be valued for those who listen to our debate a year can make all the difference in the world for a young man or woman bravely serving their country a year can make the difference between vigorous active service and life in a wheelchair or a brain injury from a war will someone fighting a long and lonely battle against all scientists to seize a year and make the memory of a beloved spouse or child a little thin a little more distant her patient battling against the tremors of parkinson's disease her year can mean more and more life activities fade out of reach  the administration's unwanted restrictions on stem cell research brings just one breakthrough just one of the many that our best scientists believe are possible that breakthrough can eat all the difference in the world but the patients who benefit they cannot wait any another year or another day for the help that stem cell research can bring and we should not wait in a jam we must take action here and now to end these unnecessary and harmful restrictions on lifesaving research continuing the administration's prescriptions mean that the gap between what scientists could do and what they are allowed to do grows even wider continuing the restriction means that our nation's best scientists will go on having to waste precious time pointless red tape and time that should be spent on the search for new cures continuing the restriction means having to tell the patients who are counting on the promise of stem cell research to wait just a little longer dream just a little less  a little more faintly the senate must act just as the house has already done one like the potential of stem cell research when the congress has approved this needed legislation we must turn our attention to sixteen hundred pennsylvania avenue and urge the president the united states not to veto the legislation gives so much hope to so many mr president the test of extraordinary statement and of our scientists our scientists and our country that we find ways and the nation finds a way for a while to the science to go full speed across a dolphin embryonic stem cells presence remind ourselves about what this really is all about because it's basically all about just individuals to extraordinary soldiers that served in iraq wounded both with james crosby from marine corps injured in karbala again with spinal injuries and that is certainly one of the areas where there is such a great hope mr president just finally one of the most  ever received in the time that i've been in the united states as senate was on this issue from lauren stanford from plymouth massachusetts fifteen years old and she wrote just after watching the prez of the united states as speak on this issue brittany set up the regina regime which we've all commented on the limits of the great possibilities that we've talked about during the course of this debate and this is what she said that night referring to the night that the president talked that night president bush talked about protecting the innocent i wondered then what about me i'm truly innocent in this situation i did nothing to bring my diabetes on there is nothing i can do to make it any better all i can do is hope for research breakthrough and keep living the difficult demanding life of a child with diabetes until that breakthrough comes how i ask my parents is it more important to throw just carded embryos into the trash that is to let that be used to hopefully save my life and to give evacuee life where i don't have to accept a constant almost insane level of hourly medical intervention as normal how could my nation do this to me that's the issue that lauren go back to the palace of my time who yells time is present let me think of north korea's record in iowa for his leadership i know he and many others in this chamber have spent a great deal of time to put together a piece of legislation that is very very important and i commend all of them there are times on the floor of the senate where we are engaged in certain kinds of debates that cause folks to exhibit some temperance and concern and anxiety and impatience this is one of those issues however that people feel very differently about we'll have people come to the floor on this issue of stem cell research and feeling very strongly on both sides i respect all of those views and i really respect everyone who comes this floor with a position on this issue but let me just say it the position as i see it is a position that deals with life and death this is very important we deal with some issues on the floor of the senate that are not so important some that are very important to this ranks way up there and important this is about life or death it's about science and so about inquiry it's about the search for unlocking the mysteries of what causes some of the dread do with for example energy and other related matters and i think science is fascinating my subcommittee we had testimony a while ago about studying termites we're studying the digestive system of termites because we're trying to understand why it is one of termite eats wood the termites digestive system produces hydrogen how is it the termite eats wood and produces hydrogen what an interesting scientific inquiry well when we're engaged  scientific inquiry in a whole range of issues especially important are the areas of scientific inquiry in the area of health what is it that causes these terrible diseases what kinds of approaches might give us a chance to cure some of these dread diseases well one of those issues is the issue of stem cell research and you know the language almost sounds like a foreign language in some of these discussions somatic cell nuclear transfer or in vitro fertilization clinics stem cell research embryos you know those are not terms people use every day and there are discussions and yet that the method of using those terms and this discussion really is about life or death it's about continuing scientific inquiry to try to unlock the mysteries of some of the most terrible diseases suffered by mankind we passed a piece of legislation last july that's moved in this direction and the president decided to veto that legislation that we hope would perhaps give us an opportunity for treatment for things like diabetes cardiovascular disease parkinson's disease payless alzheimer's perth defects spine cord injuries we don't know we can't come to the floor of the senate where we aren't scientists to describe here's exactly what will happen as a result of this scientific inquiry but we do know that there are at least indications of or a hope through this scientific in so the stem cell research and resource research rather enhancement act s five which we now have on the floor of the senate would allow researchers to pursue all kinds of promising stem cell research including embryonic stem cell research that is federally funded this legislation is controversial the legislation deals however only with embryos that were created the purposes in vitro fertilization clinics that would otherwise be thrown away now in vitro fertilization is a relatively new term spin around for about twenty five years there are more than one million children walking on this planet of ours that were born as a result of in vitro fertilization we had testimony before one of my committees the commerce committee in which a witness said none of them should have been born none of these human beings are where they should have been born he disagrees with in vitro fertilisation his right to do that i don't support that i think the wonder of life here of having one million people one million people that once were babies born to people that  couples that were unable to have children is a wonderful gift what a wonderful gift and so and vitro fertilization has been around for a quarter of a century because of the nature of the treatment the infertility treatment in this process more embryos are created than will ever be used rather than throwing these embryos in the waste as hospital waste or just  waste prominent vitro fertilization clinic it is much more life affirming i think to use them to better understand how we might treat devastating diseases such as diabetes heart disease alzheimer's  senator jack danforth former senator jack danforth said it best he's a colleague that serves here with us in the senate he said this quote it is not evident to many of us that cells in a petri dish are equivalent to identifiable people suffering from terrible diseases i am and have always been pro life but the only explanation for legislators comparing cells in a petri dish to babies in the womb is the extension of religious doctrine into statutory law that from former senator jack danforth what a profound statement do you equate the cells in a petri dish with someone suffering the ravages of parkinson's disease or ls i don't think so but but that really suggest somehow that those who oppose this legislation make that equation this legislation isn't suggesting that anyone create an embryo for the purpose of research it is saying those embryos that are about to be discarded thrown away thousands of them because many more are produced fertilization clinics rather than simply throw them away how about with the consent of those from whom the embryos came how about using them for a life affirming purpose for the needed research into unlocking the mysteries of these devastating diseases there are about four hundred thousand embryos frozen in these clinics it's estimated eight to eleven thousand scheduled to be discarded i believe in the next year it's interesting no one has come to the floor of the senate that i'm aware of saying shut down these in vitro fertilization clinics shut them down and by the way of someone's right tries to throw away an embryo as they do every day if they try to throw away have someone arrest them because you're throwing away a human being it is of course not a human being it has the potential to become a human being if it is implanted in a woman's uterus and grown to term but it will it with it will not be implanted in the uterus in fact it will be discarded in a waste basket and the question my colleague asks with s five is with consent should that embryo rather than simply be discarded not be able to be used for this critically important research there are not enough stem cell lines available we know that my colleagues have made that case the president authorized some stem cell lines but the authorized lines were never enough and in fact they were contaminated and it is just a plain fact that we are at this point interrupting the scientific inquiry where interrupting the opportunity to search for your cure for these diseases the embryos we are discussing on the floor of the united states senate are going to be destroyed that is certain these embryos are going to be destroyed could they should they be used to search for the cure for these dread diseases i believe the answer is yes you know in my last campaign for the united states senate a curious commercial was run against me by my opponent he ran a commercial which is descriptive of some who very feel very strongly in opposition to this kind of legislation because i support stem cell we search very strongly my opponent ran a commercial of a man sitting around a fire in a kind of a campfire with about six or eight young children around him and the commercial i suppose was meant to be humorous but about a serious subject a young child with eyes very big reflected in the glow of the fire around that fireplace said to the camp leader tell us the story  the scary story and the man said well there is a man named byron different to me i guess a man named byron and he has a plan his plan is to implants into a mommy's uterus that's fertilized to become a fetus so that they can harvest it during that pregnancy to use it for body parts later little children around that campfire have eyes a size a dinner plates and that's scary story of course that was a perversion a complete perversion of anything remotely related to the truth that no relationship to any of these issues no one is talking about implanting something in a uterus for the purpose of growing a fetus for the purpose of harvesting body parts that kind of unbelievable live permeates all too often this discussion that is not what this two expression is about those of us in this chamber and there are many of us who have sat in the front row of a funeral my case of a daughter of a father and ask ourselves was there anything was there anything more we could have done is there anything that could have been done to prevent this disease the answer if we prevent this kind of research the answer for everyone will be s there is something we could have done we could have continued the scientific in with carefully constructed guidelines see if we can unlock the mysteries of these diseases let me show you a picture of a young girl named camille in fact i just saw camille within the last month this young girl has been very near death she suffers from juvenile diabetes a particularly acute condition of juvenile diabetes that's camille in the middle so her mother last week in north dakota camille was in to washington d c about a month ago with her mother i've known camille for some long while this young girl holding the clarinet in her middle school band set a tough life has lived on the edge suffering from a very significant disease one that has cost too many too many americans and especially too many young americans their lives but there are so many opportunities for research and for potential treatment let me give you a couple of examples i was on an airplane one day with one of the research at the researchers at the unbelievable work he told me of the use of stem cells among a group of mice who had had induced heart attacks since their bill of creating heart attacks and they used stem cells to inject back into the heart rest of the muscle of those mice and in a matter of a couple of weeks a substantial percentage of those mice showed no evidence of having had a heart attack a substantial portion had complete recovery let me give you a couple of other examples researchers at johns hopkins reports paralyzed rats that partially regain the use of previously immobile hind legs in studies in which scientists injected the roads with stem cells from mouse embryos potential to treat a l s university of wisconsin madison scientists have turned stem cells into nerve cells carrying messages between the body and the brain offering possibilities for repairing damage caused by ls embryonic stem cells researchers at u c l a agents to able to coax human embryonic stem cells into becoming mature that i don't want to over promise i'm not a scientist all i can tell you is this when we look when we search when we enquire when we use america's best minds in research using good ethical guidelines important guidelines valuable guidelines for scientific inquiry we then find ways to unlock these mysteries and it's pretty unbelievable what we have done in a relatively short period of time we have a polio vaccine we've cured smallpox go to the hospital these days and take a look at the the wonderous machines and the wonderful treatment and and all of the things that we're doing all of that is a matter of experimentation and developing experience from that experimentation the fact is embryonic stem cell research has a very broad and very strong bipartisan support that bipartisan support is evident here in the united states senate we've had united states senators on both sides of the political aisle here stand up in strong support of this legislation let me use a chart that my colleague senator kennedy just used because it is i believe so important doctors are who need the director of the national institute of tell doctors or who need says this is president bush's own and i director quote from my standpoint it is clear today that american science would be better served and the nation be better served if we let our scientists have access to more stem cell lines that from the president's own appointee he had the national institutes of health i know that in political life there are a lot of labels for life pro choice pro this pro that anti that  just observe it is not in my judgment as some have suggested a pro life position to diminish or shut off critically needed research that will give people who have parkinson's disease diabetes lou gehrig's disease cardiovascular disease cancer or any number of the things that kill so many americans it is not pro life to diminish restrict or shut down the research that gives people an opportunity for hope that there might be a cure for these diseases through this kind of scientific inquiry and research i recognize this is controversial i understand that i respect someone who comes on the floor and says senator dorgan you're dead wrong you're wrong about that i respect that this is not an easy issue difficult issue for a lot of people i have not found it particularly difficult for me because i believe that those of us who have seen the ravages and that should be most everybody in this chamber have seen the ravages of these diseases to our loved ones to our friends to so many americans i believe that this country would want us to do everything possible to give the tools to the best scientific minds and the best people in the medical field possible to unlock the mysteries of these diseases and find the cures for these diseases that's what this debate has been long about it this debate however is even narrower than many we've had on this subject this debate is about a single issue can we use embryos that are otherwise going to be discarded from in vitro fertilization clinics that are otherwise simply going to become waste and destroy today tomorrow next week next month all year long could use can we use with the permission of the donors those embryos for the scientific inquiry that's necessary for the extension of life in the curing of these great diseases can we do that the answer clearly off the b s allowed resulting yes coming from this chamber my colleague senator harkin has been at this a long long time i've spoken on this is a good number of times on the floor of the senate myself but it is not just senator harkin he has joined in a piece of legislation on a bipartisan basis by some very significant voices in the united states senate saying let's do this let's do this for this country all of those out in this country who are suffering from these dread diseases deserve our help they certainly don't deserve a government that says oh by the way we understand your suffering but we believe that we would prefer to choose to destroy and discard embryos from an invader fertilization clinic rather than extend the scientific research that might find a cure for what is killing you that is not an acceptable answer from the united states senate so let me thank my colleague senator harkin for the time and we thank the many colleagues who have spoken in favor of this decision and offer the fervent hope and i believe that it exists that we can pass this legislation with a very very substantial about i thank him for that and i thank him for his strong support of a vast five our legislation to basically do what he really i think really encapsulated by saying this is really about saving lives and that's really w all about mr president i ask unanimous consent that the previous order be modified to provide that the vote on passage of s five occur at five fifty five p m that's a republican leader be recognized five twenty five p m with the other provisions remaining in order provided for that the additional ten minutes be equally divided between senators harkin and coleman isaacson and senator brownback or their designees is there any objection senator from georgia scruggs now you have ten minutes of our time distinguished senator from minnesota senator coleman who's worked countless hours on this very important subject ten minutes this president senator minnesota's recognized president as i listen to  my distinguished colleague from the neighboring state of north dakota there's so much that we agree on what we agree on is that we want to move science forward we want to provide hope for those who are suffering from diseases and conditions that that the possibility that stem cell research could move forward the issue here simply by it is a matter of federal funding what do we put federal dollars into and should there be any moral questions that are raised before we make that decision to put federal dollars into something and i think that's a legitimate issue to discuss on the floor of the senate it is a reflection of the reality that in this country there is substantial disagreement of what is appropriate use of federal dollars this is not about shutting off research not about stopping research it's not about a lack of research going on we still lead the world in research in embryonic stem cell research  percent of all the publication that is offer in this country eighty five percent of the dollars may be from what we've provided both embryonic by the way to adult stem cell research we're leading the world in this and that's federal dollars  addition that substantial private dollars but when this issue arose early on president clinton had his own bioethics commission and this is what they said they concluded that the derivation of stem cells from embryos remaining following in fertility treatments is justifiable only if no less morally problematic alternatives are available for advancing the research the reality is we reached a point today where there are these alternatives available we have an opportunity to sue them and there is a political reality mr president and that is s five will pass pass and version of pass in the house president has said he is going to veto it because of his concern of federal funding for the destruction of of human embryo and as a result in january first of this year there's going to be no more research going into embryonic stem cell research tomorrow than there is today unless you pass as thirty unless you pass s thirty provides an opportunity by the way some a vest thirty s k is in has five a side is going to be vetoed and so if you care about making more than a political statement but actually talking to the parents of kids with juvenile diabetes or adults with parkinson's or whatever the reality is if you care about more than one hundred thirty two million dollars going into human embryonic stem cell research you have to support that's the reality of political reality but in addition what edge there any offers is the opportunity to have i think a great a sense of national unity on this issue to get beyond the culture wars to get beyond the political research should be all of out senate issac's it is talk about dead embryo research and i hope that the it was the description was clear enough i think there was some confusion on the floor from some my colleagues on the other side of this issue the fact is that cells that have the capacity to differentiate into other types of cells that's an opportunity without crossing a moral line all of america to come together and say this is a good thing for the money into stem cell research and and not dividing this fertilized egg and boom you get an embryo and science is telling us today that with all their nuclear transfer with genetic repro range of things what you can do is you can take that egg you can a nucleic cut out the center you can put in the adult material but before you transfer it you turn it off a little switch a little code in the end you don't get an embryo but you get this inner cell and i asked then has the capacity of poor potency not  ability to different of cell types and all that but the elasticity in the hope in the possibility that you get from embryonic stem cell research without crossing a moral line isn't that what we should be doing is that shutting off science and scientists said well this is a diversion well certainly it's not a diversion of practical sense because right now there will be if s five passes there will be no additional funding for embryonic stem cell research but if asked thirty passes you can open up the world to simply producing more knowing that the research money is going to be there the reality wait wait with those cells that are in those i v s clinics is that they are limited genetic lines and if you have certain minorities or other groups who are not represented in those as you are in the but if we look at things like altered nuclear transfer you can have an on ended supply unending supply of genetic material so you can deal with specific gene types and deal with specific illnesses s with what you have now under s five the bottom line in all of this is that there is a debate in this country that the debate is not over moving the science forward the debate all is not over whether there should be hope there is hope there is a i think it's important in this debate to understand some of the realities reality of what we're talking about that yesterday in the floor of my colleagues i think the senator from iowa was talking about some of the work being done with that embryos that some of the work being done with in nuclear transfer and saying well this could take a decade reality mr president is that the work being done today and stem cell research embryonic at best may take decades decades and so the question then ultimately is can we as a nation decide on a process that does respect a moral line that does say we're not going to devise credible funding for the destruction of human embryo but because we have the possibility and we should explore the possibility realities that we're looking at is well if they haven't developed enough what if what about the idea of developing limbs and other things should we let the embryo grow longer what do you draw that line a whole range of other issues that we're going to have of be debating as we as we move along this process with the great advance of scientists and for those of us who support us clarity what we're saying is we have a past we have an opportunity to do it with a sense of unity but the sense of where we do provide a moral line to live by the way that has been part of our last actors for a long time we don't surprise provide federal funding the destruction of human embryos and that's what this is about it's not about size the reality and size is you could fit seven days on the head of a pin but it's about that basic moral line which is part of our law for a long time and so this approach that we haven't asked five his approach that is pro science and pro research and pro whole and it's the only one practical one that in the end if it passes will result in more funding for embryonic stem cell research tomorrow than we have today i fear mr president is what happened last  happen this year this body passed both a version of s five as well as a version that provided for some alternatives that was expected santorum vale s thirty provides for more than what was inspector it will provide for in fact new read new dollars  going to research that isn't funded today but the house chose to say it's all or nothing if you don't pass the the s five veridian the castle veil then we're not going to even even put any funding when i can do anything i can allow any alternatives to pursued that would be a shame as the president and i tell mike you still i can't be like cutting off your nose to spite your face that would be a shame i hope that my colleagues and on both sides of the aisle wherever they stand on this issue they can be comfortable supporting as they're ready they can be confortable supporting a bill that provides for the moral line but at the same time opens up the opportunity for existing research arijit support to mr president i yield the floor fact the case and that is that everybody in this chamber is saying which senator from iowa myself wants more hope for americans and both bills offer a path to do that we may have our differences on those passed but no difference in the hope that it offers and i commend senator coleman was very articulate explanation of that and i would i think join with the senator from iowa and encouraging our colleagues that may be listening we have some time this morning that we can be still if we have members who want to come to the floor and speak they should contact the cloakroom and let us know from both parties and from both sides of every issue because we want to fill every minute and with that i will serve the balance of my time this president senator from our what i just concur with my friend from georgia that if people want to speak they could come over now now we have a list of speakers i think the center isaacson does too for later on in the day i can only say to senators as the clock ticks your time's going to get squeezed more and more so that if you're scheduled to speak for say ten minutes this afternoon you may get squeezed to three minutes or two minutes or one minute so if you'd like to have your  about this embryonic stem cell bill i would say now would be the time to come over i say to all the senators who may be in their offices right now call the cloakrooms and and we'll make the time available right now mr president how much what is the situation might i ask right now with the time existing right now the senator from iowa has fifty eight minutes to his senator from georgia has thirty and unfortunately if we research on young human life it puts that young human life to death and at the same time is not producing results of cures that we had hoped would be taking place my colleagues are on another  treatments that been taking place in the report that came out from northwestern university in the chicago area about a new diabetes treatment and reading from the article developed at northwestern university's allows patients to stop taking insulin for more than two years they've raised questions about this process that was done in brazil rather than the united states and thirteen of the fifty patients in this adult stem cell study went off and on for at least six months as a note prompting cautious excitement from some researchers who have seen the results and i want to read one researcher dr gordon see we're a diabetes development on the adult stem cell research area and field they've raised questions about this trial and some of it taking place in brazil i've raised questions about why is that we're seeing these breakthroughs taking place and we're having patients in united states go to bangkok go to to portugal treatments being developed in brazil rather than in the united states and i believe that if we would put our funding here that we're using in the embryonic field the six hundred thirteen million dollars that's produced no human treatments today produced a lot of tumors and lab animals if we would put that in the adult field where we're getting results we have invested in the adult field but what if that six hundred thirteen million were in the field today with these breakthroughs be happening here instead of in brazil by u s researchers in brazil why aren't they being done in the united states and i hope my colleagues will look at that sun there's a second there's another point i want to start and raise with with my colleagues at this point in time and just say let's presume that they are successful  embryonic stem cell research let's presume in a decade in twenty years that they are successful embryonic stem cell research that is going to lead to the necessity of us moving forward with human cloning because of the development of this technology and embryonic stem cell technology if you're using embryo and the genetic material doesn't match up there's go embryo to vulnerable women who have be coerced into donating their eggs that potentially significant risk to their health the legislation to make clear that the cloning of human persons is not something that we as a society will accept brownback levels transgress is our heritage is most sacred about what is good and true and beautiful western civilization indeed is built on the tenet that every human life has a measurable value human beings are and in themselves it's wrong to use any person as a means to an end upon this principle are laws founded and without laws have little basis human cloning for whatever purpose is wrong because it turns humans into commodities or therapeutic research and reproductive are merely adjectives used to describe what is done with the cloned human and that excel nuclear transfer is just a scientific description of the cloning process a serious report for such as a skin cell in cloning the embryos created without sexual reproduction there's no join in a vague and sperm stem cell pioneer james thompson a said quote if you create an embryo by cloning and you give it to somebody who didn't know where it came from there would be no test you could do on that embryo to say where it came from it is what it is if you try to define it away you're being disingenuous with reproductive and therapeutic cloning human beings are turned into commodities spare parts to be dissected in the laboratory they claim this sunday they may be administered other humans to provide a treatment of treatments or certainly praiseworthy but not at the expense of the destruction of other me members of the human family we all want to treat all as people and people to be treated as people i want to find a cure for cancer however it's wrong to turn humans into a means to an end is also wrong to exploit women for their eggs and here i want to develop this thought about what will take place if human embryonic stem cell research is developed is successful we have to develop clones that the genetic type of the individual seeking the treatment you're going to have to get eggs from somewhere and you going to have to get these from people from women also it is wrong to exploit women for their eggs and that's the other side of the human cloning story  as proposed by proponents of the technique would require millions of human eggs in all likelihood disadvantage women would be particularly vulnerable to exploitation via financial incentives for  really one that is allowing therapeutic cloning and even encouraging that but certainly not banning human cloning that is would regulate what could be done with the human clones normally requiring its destruction but they do nothing to prevent the process of human cloning which violates that human dignity on many levels we should take a stand against turning young human beings into commodities should not destroying human life for research purposes will not be voting on cloning today i will continue to look for es in the human embryonic stem cell research and i do not believe that's a rat that we want to proceed in our route that we want to go i want to address some of the thoughts that my colleagues have brought up about what it is that we're destroying and human embryos being destroyed for research purposes and for their stem cells and some are referred to this as potential life which strikes me as a bit like the debate that we had on the on the issue of that at that stage of development in its life cycle we all have a life cycle the embryo is simply the species at that stage of its development that's just common sense the embryo stage is a development stage but it remains experiments i think it's important that we not wishful thinking or trying to define this human embryo is a human life and we shouldn't just say well it's a potential life  time that it appears as if the current research it would take a hundred or more human cloned embryo hundred that you're going to have to harvest from young women to be able to get this process to move on forward issue accompanied by a summer intern from my office a college student from massachusetts named beth colby beth was paralyzed from the chest down in a car accident when she was fourteen years old and she came to washington like so many young women and so many young folks period just to learn about government but she also came here with a with a determination to try to fight for the scientific research that holds untold promise for her and for tens of millions of americans she wanted to be as she put it to me and asking to come to the floor during the debate on stem cell research she wanted to be a face that senators can see so that they can see what they're voting for the truth is that there are people like that in every single community in our country and they're all hoping to benefit one day from life saving stem cell therapy grandparents with parkinson's disease have that hope soldiers back from iraq killed by a roadside bomb have that hope children who decades from now will suffer from a disease that we aren't aware of yet or that we know well that stem cell research might be able to cure since we first heard about stem cell research several years ago the country has really been on a journey together we've discussed it a lot of folks have sat around their kitchen tables the living rooms talked about stem cell research everybody's debated it and we've learned a lot more about the promise and the peril of stem cell research at first our natural reaction was to temper our excitement with a well founded fear that this technology perhaps posed insurmountable ethical hurdles and the president himself deliberated the approach he appointed a task force he stud debated the fine points with teams of bioethicists and he reached what he felt was a reasonable compromise in august of two thousand and one he announced to the american people that federal funds would be used only for research on a few lines stem cells that were already harvested and back then he said that stem cells quote offer of both great promise and great peril so i have decided we must proceed with great care that was the president speaking since then america's understanding of this issue has evolved we've learned that the lines available for research are far less useful than we did initially hoped we've learned that the technology is just as promising as we dream ip and we've come to understand that embracing stem cell research does not condemn us to the slippery slope of human cloning since the president's decision stem cell research funded by private sector and by the states has gone ahead across the country but it's gone ahead mr president slow sure than many of us fight like in the absence of crucial federal funding fast enough to fill the pages of major medical journals with exciting new discoveries but this research has taken place on a large enough scale that our most important educational research institutions to be able to tell us that it addresses our major fears what in the summer of two thousand and one might have seemed like a well founded suspicion has completely proven to be unfounded as newt gingrich told me yesterday after reversing himself and acknowledging that the threat posed by global warming is both urgent and real serious legislators change their stances over time that's permissible that's the product of thinking it's the product of additional information and additional input just look at the senate republicans like john mccain former majority leader bill frist senator from utah orrin hatch is here on the floor now have looked carefully at the scientific facts and have searched their own consciousness and they have all reached the same conclusion opposing stem cell research is the opposite of a pro life policy last summer sixty three senators republicans and democrats alike and two hundred thirty five house members voted in favor of stem cell research that was a responsible bil a consensus bill and it was designed specifically to address the concerns of lawmakers who are worried about bioethics and appropriately worried now it's difficult as we know to get sixty three senators to agree on anything more controversial than the sort of standard fare of america especially difficult on a polarizing emotionally charged issue mr president we came together as a senate we hammered out our differences we came together in the house we arrived at a smart sensitive piece of legislation that reflected a consensus and respected our collective conscience and when we did so we were confronted by a president who promise to proceed with great care whose commitment to deliberate and to deliberation had calcified into a stubborn refusal to confront reality or to reengage in a changing debate america has evolved on this issue but the president has stood still and that is why over an overwhelming bipartisan senate majority the president finally dusted off the veto pen and offered up the first and to date the only veto of his entire presidency the president signed good and bad legislation torture bills pork giveaways to all companies tax cuts for millionaires but this when it came to a strong national consensus on an issue that brings hope to families across the country the president chose to shut down the debate and block federal funding for scientific research make no mistake mr president this is a personal issue deeply personal for each of us in this chamber and for the president i understand that i'm confident the president made his decision about stem cell research over six years ago and he searched his mind in a start just as all of us who care passionately about this issue have done but if he vetoes stem cell research yet again that would send a message to this that this country no longer intends to be the global leader in scientific knowledge and discovery and it would send a message to america suffering from parkinson's from spinal injuries from countless ailments that their well being is not the most important thing to us we are telling these people that we could do more to cure you but we choose not to we're telling them that help is not on the way the current policy is eroding our national event john stubbs cell research and it is undermining the hopes and dreams of millions of americans we're tying our scientists hands behind their back and holding them holding them back from the possibilities of the future this present we need a federal policy that builds on the advances that are being made in our states in our universities in our private foundations in our research centers all of them  thoughtful and sensitive way to the ethics that are concerned in this issue the research now is already showing tremendous promise in my home state of massachusetts some of the best scientists in the world are working at the white head institute providing medical research at mit and the harvard stem cell institute we're still in the early stages of this line of research but there is here the kind of discovery that that we're already making let me explain the harvard stem cell institute identified cells that they call nast or cardiac stem cells a single cell type that gives rise to the major cellular building blocks of them and they leonhard that discovery rewrote the story of cardiac development and contributed a significant building block toward what could become revolutionary new treatments for heart disease we're already seeing curious but diseases in our labs at the white head institute a leading stem cell research rudolf gene janish and his team use stem cell therapy to cure a mouse suffering from an immune deficiency disease that's you can see in this present the research is still in the early stages so we can't say that with the immediate results are going to be for humans but rest assured today as breakthroughs in mice have often become tomorrow's cures for humans now we can all hope that alternatives to embryonic research hold similar promise but you can't wish away what our scientists are telling us research on them the onyx stem cells is incredibly promising pivotal for this new field and not easily sidestep nobel prize winners past and present most likely future believe that this is the future viola g of medical science people of goodwill and good sense can resolve these complicated ethical issues without stopping lifesaving research the country has led the world in revolutionary discoveries with our breakthroughs and our beliefs moving ahead together symbiotically senate passage of this bill with a veto proof majority can put us again on that as president we're giving this administration yet another chance to consider a misjudgment with profound consequences we're working to create a framework for ethical federally funded research like the bill passed last summer this legislation provides important ethical safeguards by extending federally funded research only to embryos that are one donated by in vitro fertilization clinics to created specifically for fertility treatment not for research three in excess of treatment needs and what otherwise be discarded and for donated by treatment seeking individuals who provided written informed consent and were not offered financial inducements this present i can't think of any way to more effectively and thoughtfully address the ethical it should be clear now it just doesn't make sense to allow in vitro fertilization to create millions of embryos they will never become human beings and then prohibit science from using them to cure sixty sick people and relieve human suffering but to simply discard those embryos valuing the mysteries and sacredness of human life is something that all of us should do it underlies every religion on this planet stem cell advocates are no different here in the senate and across this country americans are approaching an ethical consensus that bans human cloning that is thoughtful about the use of embryos that would be discarded and that respects life and also respects that life by protecting stem cell research this present we don't have the luxury of patients not when a hundred million americans suffer from illnesses that might one day be cured with stem cell therapy not one more than three thousand americans die from diseases every day that may one day be made treatable by stem cell research if we can get sixty seven votes out of one hundred senators for more than we had last summer then we can send the president a veto pro last summer the senate sent the administration a strong message by passing a bill that would responsibly fund this research and the american people showed their agreement last november when they sent an even larger majority back to washington to vote in greater numbers to support lifesaving scientific research sixty three votes are not enough and we hope we receive more today so that we can open the doors to this promising future and i thank the chair and i thank the leader wields times recognized thank you i'll probably take more like five minutes sorry if you want to allocate time elsewhere mr president i want to thank you for the the opportunity state today as you can tell by my location here in the sun and i'm new more than sane people who have needs and trying to address those needs that is the reason many of us are in the public eye right now hope all of us are in the public arena few of us are on touched by the many illnesses that plague has that and so all of us are aware of the issues that are affecting human beings and we all want to see right through life mr bryan and i think it's amazing the breakthroughs that are taking place today with stem cell that are taking place in america today with this race or cannot doubt there is a senator in this body not a senator in this body that doesn't support stem cell research really comes down to embryonic stem cell research mr president i want you to know that over the course of the last two years i spent a tremendous amount of time looking into this issue reading papers talking to researchers all across america visiting embryonic embryonic adoption centers where embryos are actually being adopted and creating human beings and so because of this issue and because of the ethical divide that this issue same's to create with so many americans a tremendous amount of time was put forth by myself and my but myself for stan to really reach a conclusion about this issue and to be able to communicate that the tennis fans and americans and so let me say that there are four things that i've learned about this issue senator from massachusetts just spoken hand i have a very different view on this issue and what i've learned about this issue is that honorable people can disagree honorable people who truly want to take place  americans and for people all across the world honorable people can disagree as to their viewpoint as it relates to embryonic stem cell research again all of us support adult stem cell research i think that second thing i've learned is that there being created by this thirdly that science is going to absolutely outpace our ability to deal with this issue there's no question that even if we pass legislation today that science is going to continue to outpace us this world without creating this ethical divide of destroying human embryos so i'm here to strongly support and applaud senator the senator from georgia and the senator from minnesota who have put forth the whole package and i'm here to strongly support the senate bill number thirty which allows additional resource to take place on stem cell without breaking that divide and i'm also hear the voice opposition to senate bill number five number five which actually uses federal dollars to destroy human embryos mr mr president i yield the rest of my time and thank you president senator from i was recognized for so i just want to say to my friend from tennessee that there is not one dime in s fine that would be permitted to be huge for the destruction of embryos not one dime that's prohibited by the d with whom i have worked on health issues now going back to me think about this thirteen fourteen almost thirteen years i guess back to one thousand nine hundred three someone with whom i've worked very closely on a number of health issues offered through principled unethical stem cell research and i call upon my colleagues to vote in favor of a pass of these bills and i call upon the president to sign both bills into law however let me make one point perfectly clear while i will be voting for cell research over the last several years next i want to recognize senators kennedy smith and feinstein for their courageous leadership and commitment to this important issue and in the house of representatives representative mike castle and diana de get singled out for their principled leadership on the companion embryonic stem cell research measure which was approved by a strong bipartisan vote each day the congress must address consequential events and even momentous threats to our nation  but it is not often that we have the opportunity to cast a vote that is filled with as much hope and promise for the future as the embryonic stem cell research bill we are considering today it reminds me of our companies our country's quest for space many years ago which was no more than a dream when the effort began yet what was only a vision when it was conceived you know did wonders beyond anything that we had imagined the american space program has spawned many important new advances and when i think of space exploration i thought of the gift of global positioning technology i consider the weather mapping that we depend upon to warn us of impending natural disaster i marvel at the revolution of instantaneous worldwide communication as a science embryonic stem cell research today as where the space program was when we first reigned of it and when i think of embryonic stem cell research i imagine diabetics without insulin pumps i dream of patients with parkinson's disease has spread rather than shuffle conceive of patients with spinal cord disease or injury who stand up and walk again i think a sixteen year old tortoise man ski and warm utah who sustained a severe brain injury i magine tori going back to the snowboarding and dancing that she szymanski parents flew her to china for stem cell therapy her father said something that struck me he said our hope is that next time we do this we won't have to go to china unquote america long been the world leader in ethical biomedical research and we should not lightly see this grow when i consider the potential of stem cell research i think of people like seventeen year old travis ashton of highland new to his brain was injured in a car accident today he is struggling to dribble a basketball i hope tomorrow he'll be able not only to dribble of basketball but dunk a couple of baskets as well and i think i'm a great friend president ronald reagan whose genius and energy were sapped the way and what were  commitment to helping the millions of americans who suffer from devastating and disabling diseases your support has given so much hope to so many it has been nearly a year since the united states house of representatives first approved the stem cell legislation that would open the research so we could fully unleash its promise for those who are waiting every day for scientific progress to help their loved ones the wait for united states senate action has been very difficult and hard to comprehend i understand that the united states senate is not considering voting on h r eight ten the stem cell research and hansen act sometime this month or and i know i can count of pres like you to help make sure this happens there is just no more time to wait sincerely nancy she was referring to this bill that i'm arguing for here legislation but president bush vetoed it and while i think we all know how this vote will come up today it remains my fervent hope and prayer that president bush a person whom i greatly respect and with whom i share a strong belief in the right to life will sign this bill into law i have received many letters from constituents who asked me senator hatch how can you support embryonic stem cell research when adult sense cell research is so promising unquote they ask why don't you realize that co blood research makes embryonic stem cell research on necessary unquote lancer simple who among us can know which will yield the greatest break for whom long us dares to predetermine the outcome by limiting the possibilities of ethical scientific research at the outset of this new field of research the stories i've just related compel me to advocate for all types of ethical stem cell research adult cord blood and the arctic and embryonic in fact the cord blood research we have right that that was pre conference with the house with the house number on it and and the whole senate passed it that it's not the last answer according to the scientists i talked to indeed it must be recognized that in august two thousand and one president bush became the first president to support federal funding for embryonic stem cell research the president has my respect and admiration for this decision at that time the enough the seventy eight embryonic stem cell lines would be eligible for federal support it was a good start it was also a decision that recognize discarded embryos can and should be used to advance our nation's scientific inquiry that is fundamentally still the issue before us today the present policy has not lived up to its promise in the past six years much has changed what was once thought to be over seventy stem cell lines has dwindled a number of scientists have told me that in reality the number of years of cell lines have shriveled to a merely nearly a dozen or fewer scientists it's all me that these lines are not enough to represent the general population anyway they've been genetically distorted by years of replication furthermore they're contaminated with so called animal or animal feed or cells and therefore can when they're able to scrounge up private funding for fresh embryonic stem cell lines the scientists find their hands dr linda kelly is an associate professor of medicine at the university of utah dr tele told me that the limited number of currently federally sanctioned cell lines is so unstable that in her words quote you are lucky if you can recover ten percent of the cells they send you unquote she said the cells have been reuse for so long that they have degraded and no longer represent the comprehensive human population i do not want a scientist moving to california or america's scientists moving overseas so they can do this world shaking research i do not want us scientists walking away from embryonic stem cell research because there are too many impediments to pursuing it in our country for our citizens dr marie chata is a cell biologist from emory university and is one of the many scientists who firmly believe that embryonic stem cells hold unusual promise far beyond adult stem cells which includes cord blood some cells she told me that the restrictions the current federal policy places upon her and her colleagues are in her words quote so odious that many scientists just  unquote i want scientists to try to help our people with illness i think we can see yesterday that today's vote that most senators want scientists to try sure my friends neighbors and constituents in utah  our best scientists to try in forming my opinions and views on this topic i met with many leading experts in the field of science ethics law and yes religion i met with a number of nobel laureates including dr harold varmus former director of the is widely recognized as one of the true pioneers of embryonic stem cell research he's been working on embryonic stem cell research throughout his forty year career he has been the recipient of the prestigious laskar award which is considered the most prestigious american award in via medical sciences it is often it is often the case that last year award winners go on to win the nobel prize when i was home in utah last week i spent a lot of time talking to  ask him if he could provide me with what he believes are the top reasons why our government should fund embryonic stem cell research he shared the following with me number one potential one rapid cell division into versification versatility rapid cell the vision is critical if we want to use any stem cells for transplantation therapy as we must quickly expand a limited number of cells of the large mass required for therapeutic effect embryonic stem cells are almost unique in their capacity for rapid growth without loss of developmental function the versatility of embryonic stem cells is truly remarkable in the mouse embryonic stem cells have been  for their survival and growth for example removal of the gulf intestinal some cells from their biological niche to their automatic programs stem cells obtained from the bone marrow or among the few adult stem cells currently and clinical use but they cannot yet be expanded in culture without losing their developmental function and hence they have limited therapeutic tillett a number for adults themselves are very restricted in what cell types they can produce whereas embryonic stem cells are extremely versatile and their capacity to generate different cell types adult stem cells appear to range in versatility from quite restricted for example blood stem cells that can generate multiple types types of blood cells but nothing else to completely restricted for example muscle stem cells that generate only muscle cells five then the important organs do not have adult stem cells this is something our colleagues on the other side missed very strongly and many tissues such as liver pancreas and blood vessels do not appear to have a corresponding adult stem cell population phase of diseases involving these dishes with therefore not be readily approachable by adult stem cell based therapy that could be approach using embryonic stem cell based therapies number six usefulness of existing embryonic cell lines is extremely limited the improve set of human embryonic stem cell lines authorized nearly six years ago for federally funded research is woefully inadequate some of them apparently do not exist at all others embroiled in extensive proprietary agreements that all of them though suitable for some research purposes will never be suitable due to problems with contamination for therapeutic purposes more importantly ongoing research funded by private foundations  industry or are performed abroad has brought about improvements and how that or tory's isolate and grow embryonic stem cells mouse embryonic stem cells were first characterized over twenty five years ago cell lines that researchers use today are far superior to the ones available five or ten years ago with the hope of further improvements we continue to isolate new mouse embryonic stem cell lines so long as the federal funding ban remains in place the majority of american researchers cannot make similar progress with human embryonic stem cells nor exploiting the advances made by others with the limits currently in place american human embryonic stem cell research is are in the unfortunate and unique position of being frozen in time for at by the technical limitations of mid two thousand and one while other disciplines continue to advance all over the world this makes no sense from  scientific perspective of a today's debate caucuses on the use of spare embryos to develop embryonic stem cell lines the next two points of dr capecchi center and i differ in the points that he makes they center on a different method of producing embryonic stem cell lines for the last three congresses senator feinstein and i have introduced legislation that addresses this form of embryonic stem cell research and although this issue is not squarely before us  that the majority leader will allow us to take up this important matter some time this congress number seven so that excel nuclear transfer as a research tool a limitation of i the embryo the right of stem cells is  there potential of rejection by the patient because of immunological compatibility a potential solution is the generation of quote customized unquote embryonic stem cells by sematic cell nuclear transfer s e n t which has been demonstrated in proof of concept experiments and mice that break embryonic stem cells to study human disease because s c n t allows production of patients specific embryonic stem cells this approach would allow establishing research tools for the investigation and complex human diseases such as alzheimers parkinson's a lesser diabetes in cell culture number nine lack of government commitment means lack of future research the brightest young researchers in our country are currently not engaging in human embryonic stem cell research because they are aware of its uncertain future the low level of commitment by our government to its support and of the cumbersome restrictions faced by scientists participating in this research we are losing the scientists that will carry this critical research into the future number ten health and economic implications the health and economic implications of human stem cell research are enormous and other countries have recognized this potential they are heavily investing in embryonic stem cell research our country is in grave danger of falling behind and one of the most promising fields of biomedical gives very compelling reasons for funding embryonic stem cell research i believe that all ethically responsible avenues of stem cell research should be pursued and that is the congress's obligation to the american public to see that they are pursued now let me just make one other point with regard to tumors that are claimed by the other side with regard to embryonic stem cell research dr capecchi dismissed that he said we are already solving those problems in mouse stem cell research and he's the leading milestone stem cell research in the world as far as i can see he said that is something we can do so i don't get caught up in that particular argument let me caution that no one should imagine that one bill is a stem cells that do not damage a human embryo i commend them for doing their best to try in that area it also specifies work on naturally that embryos but the concept of alive but naturally that embryo is embryos is based upon limited research that has not yet been depicted wildly widely it is promising research but it is no more than that at this stage in fact some scientists are worried that these arrested embryos are defective and would therefore produce defective stem cells and it is by no means certain that an arrest embryo can be differentiated from one that could develop further and short this idea may not pan out recently there was another flurry of activity around the embryonic stem cells the vote that counts in the minds of our best brightest and most accredited scientists and should come from my colleagues in the senate and the american public as your vote for s five the specter harken ville that has already passed the house by a broad bipartisan support our leading scientists including more than forty nobel laureates tell us that this time there is no known scientific substitute for embryonic stem cells yet i understand that the vote i ask you t is ethically troubling for some of my dear colleagues i have a long and strong record as a right to life senator i stand against abortion on demand and i think that roe v wade should never have been decided the way it was as a member and former chairman of the senate judiciary committee have worked towards a constitutional amendment banning abortion in the one hundred eighth congress i was at the president's side when he signed the bill banning the barbaric practice of partial birth abortion i was  bill why does a pro life senator support embryonic stem cell research the senator has used his twenty minutes but i have just a few more minutes all research funding to embryonic stem cells derived from frozen embryos that are to be discarded in fact thousands of such embryos are routinely discarded each year i see ethics as being on the side of creating human life through fertility treatments i see it as trying to cure human misery through ethical stem cell research as it's provided through s blood for the life of me it is hard for me to understand how we can allow between seven thousand and twenty thousand in vitro fertilized eggs to be one malady if we could find treatments or even even cures well i see it as trying to cure a human misery through ethical stem cell research as is provided through escalante when i first took this position in two thousand and one it was over the objection of some of my constituents in utah utah is a very conservative state since that time however the majority of utahans in the majority of americans have come to support the use of federal funds for embryonic stem cell research conducted under ethical guidelines bill provides this year is in past years i have had a steady stream of youth with chronic diseases visiting my office urging me to continue to push for stem cell research one young man who has been afflicted with diabetes since youth now has a a disease he urged me to continue with this fight so that maybe his son might be spared the ravages of this disease a woman disable with multiple sclerosis earnestly told me to persist a constituent with parkinson's disease told me to do whatever it takes they all want hope and i support is the bedrock of scientific research in the united states and really around the world and without and i support embryonic stem cell research will never reach its full potential in our country w constrained by his position in the administration about what he can and cannot say about the legislation before the senate in testimony before the congress and i h the national institutes of health director dr elias zerhouni recently made it abundantly clear that based on consideration of science alone embryonic stem cell research presents great opportunities for scientific advancement and doctors are honey alone the private sector will not want to invest millions of dollars into stem cell  already already know will never yield ethical treatments nor should congress and the public allow the status quo to continue if we can lock the shackles on our scientists i believe we can materially shorten the time between basic and applied research the time between the test tube and the patient's bedside let me give you just a few examples of what has been accomplished since the senate last debate of this issue in last october's nature biotechnology investigators reported that they could convert human embryonic stem cells into cells capable of synthesising insulin insulin the missing hormone in diabetics this work was conducted on privately funded stem cell lines at the university of california los angeles researchers professor of the moran i center at the university of utah reported that human embryonic stem cells injected into the eyes of blind rats improve their vision this important work was conducted with private funding and israeli team partially funded by the times disease yet with all this progress in science progressing as fast as it should i recently asked this question of an eminent neuroscientist who directs the national as it is an error a logical disease and stroke dr story landis at the health remainder of today's debate that objection so ordered is present i'm very grateful the senate is considering the issue of stem cell research today this debate marks the culmination of years of work by many of my colleagues and certainly by myself and a host of debt of dedicated advocates i thank senator harkin inspector for their leadership on this issue as well as senators hatch feinstein and kennedy working together for almost a decade the six of us have done over the years we have laid the groundwork for the senate to overwhelmingly approved federal funding for embryonic stem cell research we did this last july but as we all know unfortunately that bill was ultimately vetoed by the president that's behind us now with a new congress this becomes a new opportunity to revisit this important issue the issue of embryonic stem cell research i hope the experience of the past few months has helped my colleagues gain a fresh perspective on this issue i know they certainly have for me some a due the vote we will take later today on s five an s they're ready as a one or the other option in my opinion that is simply short sided i intend to vote for both measures the end of the day they both accomplish the goal of advancing stem cell science in the hopes of finding cures for debilitating illnesses such as parkinson's alzheimer's and diabetes to name but a few s five the stem cell research and hansen act of two thousand and seven would allow federal dollars to support research on stem cells derived from human embryos created through in vitro fertilization f thirty the so called alternatives bill would provide support for other means of deriving there are a potent stem cells in that regard both measures deserve the senate support i find troubling that these measures should be pitted against one another many argue that s five is a must pass legislation and i would tend to agree with them that should not detract from the importance of alternative forms of stem cell research sanctioned in s thirty as research on embryonic and others forms of stem cells like amniotic or plus ventile these are still in their infancy and we need to support them all to fully realize the potential this type of research that so heavily relies upon human embryos drawn from my deeply held really just believe scientific evidence and countless personal stories of individuals living living with terrible illnesses i fashion my position on the basis that i truly believe it supports the sanctity of human life and the real tension surrounding this this issue i believe it's the potential medical benefits stem cells hold against the ethical uncertainties religious convictions of some of my colleagues that this kind of research entails based upon my personal struggle with this issue i now believe any reservations with embryonic stem cell research are miss place especially when one truly considers the question of when life begins for me it begins with the mother with the implement employee implantation of the embryo i believe the scriptures provide ample support showing that flesh and spirit gospels all of these things lead me to feel comfortable with an ethical conclusion that life begins when flesh and spirit are united in a mother's womb and not before embryos created as part of the in vitro fertilization process were intended to provide infertile couples the gift of life the chance to become parents those that go unused in fertility treatment should still have the opportunity to give the group of cells growing in a petri dish if those cells are so are stored in a lab for a thousand years they have no possibility of elop ing into anything more than a group of cells they remain the dust of the earth one of the building blocks leading to lives it is the act of implant implantation within the mother that gives them life it is the act of implantation that is the essential missing ingredient in this debate so instead of storing or disregard or discarding unused embryos we have the opportunity to use them to derive much needed stem cell lines or advancement of stem cell science it is not more moral to simply throw them away well many of my pro life colleagues may not agree with my position i know they do support the intent of embryonic stem cell research that of finding cures for a number of chronic diseases and debilitating health conditions that is why i still struggle with describing s thirty as an alternative to s five it is not an alternative or a substitute it is a perfect complement to fully realize the benefits that all types of stem cell research offer i urge my colleagues to vote of permanently for both measures we're considering today the promise of embryonic stem cell research is very real those suffering from parkinson's alzheimer's diabetes cardiovascular disease and many cancers believe in that promise and so do i but we have yet to unlace the potential behind this science because of the restrictions we have placed upon stem cell while i appreciate the president allowing the research to move forward on a number of a limited number of stem cell lines we all know that over time those lines have been degraded and scientists are in desperate need of new uncontaminated lines we can expect scientists to make progress in developing today's treatments if we limit them to yesterday science i believe the federal government has a vital moral role to play in the development of stem cell science to ensure that the appropriate ethical guidelines are followed it is uncertain where we will end up if embryonic stem cell research becomes an entirely private sector venture with a lack of sufficient funding and ethical boundaries who knows where we'll wind up the federal government can guide research in the right direction i fear if we fail to show up to work on this issue we will run into a very serious problem in the long run over the last seven years it has become increasingly clear to me that being pro life requires protecting both the sanctity of human life and the quality of human lives by allowing research on application of stem cell science comes from my vote in favor of s five then i believe i have done my job and done it for rectally i have chosen to err on the side of hope healing and help i encourage all of my colleagues even those who have some ethical reservations or contrary religious feelings on this issue to do the same i've heard some refer to embryonic stem cell research is a conflict between science and religion i do not believe that is the case one of the greatest qualities and aspects of life in the united states is our religious pluralism it is something we see in the app and absence of tragically in too many places around the world we do not serve the public the public well by taking the narrowest theological position and trying to impose it on public policy the american tradition is open enough to include other considerations of ethical ideas scriptural interpretations and scientific hold i am not a scientist and i am not a theologian but i as i use my agency to interpret what i know of the scriptures and the complexities of medicine i have come to the conclusion that believe we missed the understanding of the importance of the spirit the breath of life the spirit within mankind as the essential ingredient which causes life to begin i do not find that religion and science are in conflict in the senate today i believe they are in harmony i believe we should have a broad enough you to include many views that comprise american pluralism so that point mr president i turn to the scriptures often to find wisdom that i do not have of myself and then the earliest pages of the old testament i find this statement and the lord god formed man of the dust of the ground and breathed into him him to his nostrils the breath of life and man became a living soul mr president there are two conjunction there the dust of the ground and the breath of life and then man becomes a living soul until you have both you do not have li i cannot in my comments today without mentioning also my own family's history it has played a role in shaping my views on embryonic stem cell research my mother's name was jessica udall i watched my grandmother  parkinson's i watched my uncle addison you'd all die of parkinson's watch my former my cousin's former democratic presidential candidate and arizona congressman morris k you'd all die of parkinson's so watch people die of such a malady student still in one's heart a desire to err on the side of health hope and healing we will all die mr president but no one should have to die as die as they die so with that mr president i will the floor and urge my colleagues to vote for both of these measures they are complementary they are headed in the same direction they are not putting science and faith at odds with one also important issues and i must express on ma disagreement with him while i agree with most of what he said the issue of stem cell is vital an emotional issue and one that we need to deal with carefully as we move forward in the senate on this very very important issue when brown extends cell debate stimulate some of us to defend the inherent human desire to make discoveries and to build upon them and likewise this device galvanizes others of us who defend human life as being valued and all of its forms the engineer creation or destruction of a human embryo for the sake of scientific advancement cannot be the answer to any of our ever growing challenges in this great country of ours and around the world there are many from the military conditions and ravaging diseases such as multiple sclerosis diabetes alzheimer's these people are in need of medical treatment and thanks to the brilliant minds and innovative ways of doctors and scientists across the globe many medical treatments are now available the credit advances and we can credit advances in stem cell research with this expanding form of treatment stem cell research whole from endless opportunities for our society to help create and cure people diseases and illnesses and some would like to extend a success or federally funded adult stem cells to embryonic stem cells th proposed that we carve the human embryos which have created with we had which were created with the knowledge that many of them will be destroyed to be used for research while i and others understand the great need we also know there has to be a better way in fact i know there is and that is what i want to discuss today the legislation currently being considered with direct federal taxpayer dollars specifically for the destruction of human embryos to develop cells that might lead to treatments for various health problems this raises moral objections with me in my deeply held religious beliefs we're currently funding research of non embryonic stem cells these are derived from adult stem five top adult stem cell research centers in the world and their findings are already making a difference at the university of florida researchers are making great headway with them so research they have in the works treatments for heart disease a cure for diabetes and prevention for diabetic ideas eases additionally researchers at the university of florida are making significant strides on the path towards reversing adult blindness creating your logical conditions and rebuilding human brain cells researchers in gainesville are also leading the world in identifying cancer stem cells a primary step toward identifying therapies that could cure various forms of cancer is worth noting that all of these advances have a vital common thread of these aforementioned breakthroughs come about thanks to non embryonic stem cells at the end of two thousand and five president bush signed a bill that aims to further develop our nation's cord blood inventory and allow for increased availability of existing and future stem cell treatments i was very proud to support this legislation my colleagues now this legislation made his way through congress with tremendous success the house passed there was only one dissenting vote and in the senate it passed unanimously the stem cell therapeutic and research act of two thousand and five created a new federal program to collect and store cord blood in addition the law expanding the existing bone marrow registry to include cord blood programs utilizing cord blood such as the recently created cord use center at the one of palmer hospital in my own home state of florida are building on this valued and expanding foundations these programs are dancing science without the moral compromises that would otherwise have to be made when empowerment hospital for women and babies in orlando is now able to contribute  diverse and increased supply of cord blood this is reassuring news for the thousands of people who would otherwise die unnecessarily each and every year were it not for the large genetically diversified stem cell bank that is a wonderful mother agreed to donate her placenta or that the lifesaving cord blood was collected ten years after receiving step as the stem cell transplant even remains completely cancer free not only this but before his give the gift of life to the nation of their core blood desperate to desperately needed in lifesaving interventions essentially new life is helping to stimulate more life this allows us to help countless people the need without the moral dilemma presented by the embryonic alternative which for microstate perspective is not really a good alternative cord blood is currently being used to treat nearly eighty is easily adult stem cells have made and will continue to make a recognizable contribution to helping those with leukemia sickle cell disease and other potentially fatal illnesses and conditions opponents of embryonic stem cell research say that they want to make available for research only those embryos that are in their words on one of my colleagues recently asserted if these embryos were going to create life we wouldn't be supporting research on them yet there's proof that these embryos are living things and that are donated and adopted by a couple where fertilization techniques were gone and successful to date one hundred thirty three snowflake babies have been born with nearly another two dozen on the way had these in the words of the the embryos been tossed aside human life would have been literally discarded many americans agree that we need to move forward on this issue with britain's in a way that respects and values human life and we stand to balance our interest in helping those in need without destroying human life there is a good base of legislation being consider that i want my colleagues to consider today and support under the whole pack the living embryo would be damage or harm for the sake of research or the hope back would do is allow scientists for the first time to apply for federal funds to perform research on embryos that have died naturally during the invader a process for those hoping to find a cure  embryonic stem cell research this would be a modest principal step forward in achieving that goal it would also be the right step to take because it is the only option that opens that opens up new frontiers without damaging human life and move in this direction with not only detract from the results that we have seen for federally sponsored adult stem cell research i encourage my colleagues to strongly consider and vote in favor of the hope and we must be dedicated not only to research with preserve and protect lives adult stem cells hold great promise have had more proven success in lab trials on actual applications and they do not require the destruction of human life and this is where our federal funding to why would we do that why wouldn't that be the better option we know it's possible to do both at the same time and it seems to me to be a reasonable thing to do that is why i would urge my colleagues to support the whole taxpayer federal taxpayer dollars to destroy human life to develop additional stem cell lines that is about the second point is and i think this is a critical one if we want to talk about cures which i believe that's what the debate  speculative embryonic stem cell research that has not produced results today and is unlikely to produce results in the near future if at all if ever and if they do produce results it is going to move us towards human cloning because we're table today but that's what this move because that's what is going to have to happen if this works if it will ever work that route i want to get us back on those are the central questions that we're about now let's talk about the facts on the central questions we have invested heavily as a country embryonic stem cell research we have invested on adult stem cell research we've invested nearly six hundred thirteen million dollars on embryonic stem cell research in total since two vocally contaminated with mouse materials and could never be used and if you know how to grow them they're fine and that's in an article where one of the individuals a c e o of a stem cell company is saying that so we have this we have six hundred thirteen million dollars going into this area over the last since two thousand and two one would reasonably expect we ought to have some results after over half a billion dollars going into the field in this period of time where a lot of efforts from the scientific community we have known about embryonic stem cells for twenty five years and the magazine nature in two thousand and six marked the twenty fifth anniversary of the two papers reporting the first mouse embryonic stem cell twenty five year celebration so we've known about embryonic stem cells for twenty five years for the last ten years but we've been able to research on in lab animals for the last twenty five years exciting development that took place a quarter of a century ago we've invested heavily six hundred thirteen million dollars the last since two thousand and two we put a lot of money into this with a lot of scientific effort into this and what do we got that should be a reasonable question that  ask all my colleagues would say well ok we've talked about this we've put money in it we've discovered it we've put a lot of our best scientific minds into this field what do we have results of dull versus embryonic we've invested in adult we've invested more in adult and we have an embryonic but it's not and in consequential amount that we put an embryonic six hundred thirteen million dollars let's say the current human applications in the two fields of adult versus embryonic allergies and infectious diseases embryonic stem cell research in human applications zero we have fifteen in the adult field cancer institute zero s c r twenty six with adult child health institute a role here fields and you can see what we've been able to do in the adult field by the investment we have there so here practicality standpoint that one would look at this say we've known about these for twenty five years we put six hundred thirteen million dollars into it we have zero human clinical applications today taking place we've got over and here i want to show an adjusted chart i'm sorry that this is one we've had the paper over but just yesterday we had juvenile diabetes northwestern university and here's the quote from a researcher that was reviewing it from harvard medical school saying quote their results look better than anything i've seen so far type one diabetes we added gladly to the board today seventy three different human applications that we have in adult stem cells we don't have amniotic fluid yet developing which i think we should start banking amniotic fluid placenta because of the rich stores of sam's cells  but we haven't quite started that yet today so we've put in adult embryonic we have a lot of results in adult i held this after my colleagues yesterday but i hope that they get a chance to about what we should be investing in that's yielding results in the adult versus the embryonic field that's taking place the tumor problem my colleague from utah was saying well we can get over this tumor problem that's taking place  unfortunately i have a stack and i put it in the record yesterday of research papers and that was just really a sampling of it where the embryonic stem cells are producing tumors this is tumors into tumors are taking place not just one of a stack of research papers saying that this is a problem it is a difficulty that we have now it's talked about again because to me that's what we've really got to get bottom in the united states i guess whether they're being attracted overseas to do adult stem cell work and not in the united states but this was northwestern university that was doing this in brazil want to look at parkinson's because one of my colleagues raised the issue of parkinson's which is a very difficult terrible disease that confronts and confounds us as a society and as individuals and i want to  point to my colleagues an individual i had into testify in two thousand and four that was a parkinson's patient that testified about his treatment with his own stem cells that were taking place parkinson's patient doctor dentis turner where he was parkinson's for a period of five years we've tried to get him in to testify a number of different times had trouble he was out doing african safaris after his stem cell treatment that he was doing so well  my point is here on this is that we've tried this we've tried it aggressively we've tried it ethically to say ok let's try it embryonic stem cell work on lines where the life and death decision has already been made that was the president's determination in two thousand and one he was saying we don't know at this point time where the science will lead us let's try it on these ethical lines because somebody has already made the life and death decision put money into it start and then non human area first because we want to develop this in the animal models which is clearly the right way to go let's invest heavily in it which i noted in the early chart one million from two thousand to two thousand and six trying to find is there a place is there a way this works we continue to have this tumor problem that coming up in almost all of the studies but yet we're saying let's try it on human embryonic and these lines have already been developed and we still are not getting the results so why would we continue to have to fund in this area and now we want to expand the funding in this area and we want to expand the lines and we want to even not only go there we want to cross the divide that many of us have different opinions on but all of us have to say this is a profound question of taxpayer dollars to fund the destruction of young human life and we're all troubled about that one way or the other about that but that's the question on this twenty two human clinical trials now going on being recruited for no longer recruiting for using adult stem cell work right now so this is going on it's going on well we're not seeing any of it in the embryonic and now i want to take another step i want to use taxpayer dollars i want to destroy young human life and i want to create more embryonic stem cell lines never mind that it hasn't worked today think we ought to do it and i don't think this is a wise move i don't think it's wise practically i don't think it's wise ethically in spite of the thoughts that others might have ronald reagan as he said you know if if you didn't know if somebody was was alive or dead you wouldn't very i'm sure just as a common sense thought because my colleagues in oregon did a very good discussion of the ethical issues here but yet i get even detect in his thoughts this is a troubling question it's a tough one so we're not sure if it's alive or dad wo well no you wouldn't and if we have a moral question about this and we have a route where we can use this six hundred thirteen million to get treatments for people like dennis that i put up here and that we've had some successes in if we can get treatments for diabetes that are being developed by northwestern university but for some reason we're not having enough interest here to do them here we're having to do them in brazil i want people to get treatments i want parkinson's treatment to take place we've got around to do this and we're not unlimited on money resources in the health care field i think we should invest more in the health care field but we've got a route to go here we've got a route that can use the resources if we're at fourteen hundred twenty two clinical trials now my guess is that the a lot more that we could try and i put up pictures of people here yesterday that are having to go to portugal for spinal cord injury treatment i want to put her picture back up here again because she wonders why i can do this here and i might also note to my colleagues it's critical that this is done quickly they're finding in these early research results that th sooner you can get the treatment for a spinal cord injury the more likelihood of success so how many people here can afford to fly to portugal for the treatment and how much better would have a if this were done in chicago or in kansas city where people could go in this country with this lady from central illinois was having to go to portugal or we're finding this in the diabetes area they're saying that the sooner the treatment is taking place and this is common sense to most of us as well we know this that the sooner you catch something the more likelihood that you have of success if we get quick treatment should we be foreseen people then to go to brazil and portugal and thailand to get these adult stem cell treatments many of which were developed in the united states are being done by u s researchers and now being conducted abroad why i understand that we're all after this goal of  treatments and i would hope and i give that to my opponents that that's what they're after on this as well and if they see this hope and promise i can cross the ethical boundary that they have been able to do on this i find that gene textbook that says this about when does life begin talking about the fiala gene but the biology of this says although life is a continuous process fertilization is a critical landmark because  ordinary circumstances a new genetically distinct human organism is thereby formed presiding officer wouldn't be here feels destroyed as an embryo if we have somebody in the future in this body say destroyed as a prose an embryo she isn't going to be here as a u s senator this life is a continued when we all know this this is not something that's new to anybody here is hannah was a snowflake baby a frozen embryo that was adopted we have another route to go on these frozen embryos we can really push an adoption techniques if destroyed at this early stage obviously isn't here to later phase we know that and we know what the embry textbook says and we know each of us started as an embryo so why would we do this and i understand you were sent well because we want cures and i do too we've got an ethical route to go in the cures we've got a route that's producing enormous successful results and one is producing no results now maybe it well in a decade or two decades over a large us expenditure over a great ethical divide that we all are troubled about and then we'll expand into human cloning to be able to get a genetic match because it will have to because otherwise if you do this with embryonic stem cells and implant them and the genetic type doesn't match up with that of the body you're going to have to have immunosuppressants used all your life is that likely we're going to continue that route they know we're obviously going to have to do human cloning develop young human clones that genetically match the individual that's traded you're going to have to harvest thousands if not maybe millions or hundreds of thousands of women's human eggs to develop the human clones do we want to go there with women that we don't want to go and so why would we start down there for we don't want to go there and we've got an ethical route to go i just would plead with my colleagues that we don't need to do this we don't need to jump over this ethical divide we don't need to ignore this definition we don't need to create a legal fiction that yes it's a human it's a live but it's not a life that we're doing now with this discussion we don't need to go back to the old debate treating human life as property and that you can patent it and own it and manipulated trade it for your own purposes we've been there before we've always regretted it and why would we do that now we don't need to go  there just ask my colleagues let's not go there let's go this route we can all agree on let's expand let's do an audit fluid banking that we can agree to let's do that banking of those stem cells that are in there and creating more curers invest heavier in the adult stem cell field that we can create and find those cures let's have the straightness done in the united states not forcing people to travel overseas to get these treatments we don't need to go there we don't need to get women into a position that we're paying them to harvest their eggs we don't need to go down the route of human cloning creating life for our own purposes we have done that before and deeply regretted it this is a turning point for us no doubt how the vote's going to come out today that will be in favor of s five i think that's regrettable believe the president that he says he's going to veto it hope he does strongly in support of him in doing that and let's instead of having a culture that looks at using life let's have a culture that values life that sees every life as dignified as beautiful as sacred as a child of a loving god not to be used for other purposes but has dignity just because of who it is because of the beauty of it who it is what's wrong with the senator from georgia controls fourteen minutes the senator from iowa controls six and a half minutes the sting was there millen ois going to be next and told me he needed a little extra time in the spirit of cooperation i'll be glad to you know five of our minutes to the senator from illinois so he would have eleven minutes and then i'll conclude is that they are yes i will yield five minutes so  total of eleven left i'm giving him five of ours in the spirit of cooperation and then i'll say do the closing is that fair that sounds good to me mr president first i want to thank my colleague from georgia for his gracious gesture here on the floor to allow me to speak and i also want to thank my colleague from iowa senator harkin with his colleague senator specter for introducing this bill on stem cell research some important things have been said on the se today i think senator smith of oregon made an exceptionally moving statement on this issue and i thank him for coming forward and sharing his views this is a tough issue it's not an easy issue and i totally respect those who see it differently than i do including the senator from kansas because they are trying to apply to this important political debate their own conscience and that's an important thing in this business that we bring our conscience to the united states  chamber i know as most people do that as we meet and debate this issue on the floor of the senate the lives of americans continue and all across america in sterile lab tori's there are doctors  scientists at work today trying to help loving couples create human life these are men and women husbands and wives who want to child and because of some physical problems cannot conceive and so they spend an enormous sums of money thousands and thousands of dollars on the chance that in this little glass dish in a laboratory that life can be created that will end up being the child that they will love the rest of their lives  beautiful story of love repeated every day across america in these laboratories i have a friend of mine who recently had a little baby girl just two weeks ago eight days after she was born i was given a bottle i thought i'd lost all those talents but they all came back to me my wife were there and marrying her and telling her mom how proud we were and she talked about going through this process and how when they went into this laboratory and looked at all of the possible embryos that could lead to the birth of this child they picked the healthiest and strongest ones that actually but there were others that were not chosen what happens to those at the end of the day what happens to those that are not chosen to end up becoming a baby they're thrown away they're discarded now senator brownback has referred to the use as nascent human life young human beings i see this a little differently i cannot understand how we can condone legally a process that will end up at the end of the day with these embryonic stem cells being thrown away and discarded when we know that if those states same stem cells that are about to be thrown away are given under appropriate guidelines with strong ethical standards or given to laboratories they could lead to cures for serious illnesses is it better morally to throw them away our better morally to use them in a positive way to enrich and save human life that's what this debate comes down to as far as i'm concerned i have many friends there isn't a family in america that doesn't been touched by alzheimer's and parkinson's and spinal cord injuries and lou gehrig's disease and diabetes we all know the stories that's part of american family life today and when you are a parent of a child who suffered one of these illnesses or diseases the first thing you want to know is doctor what can be done is there a cure is there a place i can take my daughter to where they're going to get worse surgery or procedure something to save her from this disease that's the first question a parent asks because president bush decided over four years ago to close down federal funding in this area of research it limits the opportunities to find those cures the president has said that he is asserting his moral beliefs his ethical position on this issue well every one of us brings our moral and ethical positions to these issues but you have to ask the larger question is it right for the president to impose on all of the families in america who are afflicted with these diseases his view his moral and ethical view i think that what senator harkin has done is more reasonable he has said we will have strong ethical guidelines here for this kind of research no one is going to make a dollar off this you can't direct this research toward any person this is strictly scientific closely guarded with strong ethical guidelines se isaacson has come up with an approach to to use a different form of these cells i support him i applaud his approach let us try everything we can ethically find that moves us forward here today toward finding cures that's what this should be about if you believe that the embryo was not used in vitro fertilization or human life as they've been described here i think you have a moral obligation to outlaw in vitro fertilization because frankly at the end of the day these so called nascent human lives will be destroyed we know that but you haven't heard that suggestion from those that oppose them so research they're not opposing in vitro fertilization they say go forward that knowing at the end of the day the choice was made to discard these embryos embryonic stem cells rather than to use them for the medical research i don't follow their logic on this i think it's morally consistent for them to oppose stem cell and to prohibit in vitro fertilization but they've not gone that far and we have some tough choices ahead of us in this bill but i think there are obvious choices i think we understand with senator harkin senator specter and dunn they open the door now for funding federal research in this area i'm glad my state of illinois governor blagojevich has found some money to initiate this research state of california's done the same many states are doing it why are we doing this on a piecemeal basis state by state why are we doing this as a national government as we do on medical research because the president says he doesn't view this the same as other people he has used his veto pen once as president noted states to veto stem cell research i think that's an appropriate i'd like to say mr president that as i get into this debate i think about a lot of people that i've met people who are victims of multiple sclerosis and parkinson's and alias cancer and spinal cord injuries i think about visiting the heinz v a hospital yesterday seeing a quadriplegic who has been bedridden since the korean war i magine that if you will i think about those who suffered spinal cord injuries who just want the chance the possibility that this research will allow them to lead a more complete and full life i also think of my colleague from the united states house of representatives lane evans we came to congress same year in one thousand nine hundred two wonderful great young man marine corps a veteran of the vietnam era he had to give up his congressional career last year because of parkinson's it reached the point he couldn't continue his official duties he used to come to the floor when he still couldn't beg for this bill to pass so that others suffering from parkinson's would have a chance i want to dedicate my vote in support of this bill to lane evans for those veterans and so many others who are counting on us to move this research forward a few weeks ago dr elliot's or honey director of the national institutes of health stated that our nation would be better served if federally funded scientists had access to embryonic stem cells for research he separated himself from the bush administration's official position and he said it's not possible for me to see how we can continue the momentum of science and research with the stem cell lines we have and i that can be funded from my standpoint as director of the national institutes of health it is in the best interest of our scientists our science our country that we find ways and the nation finds a way to go full speed across adults in embryonic stem cells equally i'm not going to argue against research using cord blood adult stem cells the type of stem cells that have been described by senator isaacson's and his bill but i will tell you i think we have a moral obligation to the men and women who are counting on us to open this research to find cures this is our chance with the passage of this bill i will vote in favor of both as five senator harkin's bill in this thirty sen isaac's isaacson's bill to support all ways of deriving stem cells in a positive way to save life if you are in favor of human life and making it better this is your chance what matters most in this debate is that we aim to make good on the promises we vowed to keep but support the research that can lessen so much pain for so many and support us five president i reserve the balance my time speech and so many other speeches i think this has been a terrific debate and i compliment gentleman from iowa tremendously i we've all gained a great deal of education and i think with rare exception we seem to exhibit a passion to further embryonic stem cell research and the questions really are not if that's what we should do but how we go about doing it what i've tried to do and we sent our king i had a great exchange last night where we educated one another on another's those lines have now been experimented on for five and a half years using my six elements and other things they have developed lucian are less than quality lives and it is time for us to vote on the way to be able to further future funds in embryonic stem cell research on embryos derived from grade three gardner principal remainders and in vitro fertilization arrested embryos as they're referred to in some cases dead embryos as they are referred to another but in all cases embryos that no longer are going to become alive to do generate and contain more of potent embryonic stem cells in the end i feel like that approach clearly satisfies the questions that have been rice at the white house for it's us that opportunity for a bill that would be signed by the president and does what everybody on this floor with rare exception i believe in maybe no exception wants done and that's the expansion and the extension of the research but i really end where i began with my remarks just a minute ago i want to compliment senator harkin and the others that are spoken in the advocacy that's been here today on the level and quality of the debate on this subject and i look forward to this afternoon the remaining three hours as we lead up to vote and i guess i would say the same things that are my would if any members want to speak this afternoon is time to let us know now rather than later because we'll only have three hours equally divided between four different groups so with that said mr  senate expected to wrap up debate today on stem cell research bills that it is considering two pieces of legislation concurrently at the same time as five live federal embryonic stem cell research restrictions imposed by president bush in two thousand  and the other bill as thirty upholds a ban on federal research funds for embryos created for research purposes only a vote expected about this o'clock this afternoon on this legislation and then after stem cell research we could move onto a bill to allow federal government negotiate prescription drug prices also possible debate on intelligence authorization be agreed to and that these requests be pending the record without objection consent that the senate now stand in recess until the hour of two fifteen under the previous order the senate will stand in recess until the are two fifteen p m