Real Men of Principle ...

Representative Culberson's Statement on H.R. 810, the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act

The debate over the use of human embryonic stem cells for medical research has resulted in the passage of H.R. 810 in the US House of Representatives. Although I support the use of embryonic stem cells for medical research if the parents' consent, adoption is not possible, and the stem cell is scheduled to be destroyed, I could not vote for passage of HR 810 because the bill contained no limit on the number of stem cells that would be made available for research. I have always been troubled by and opposed to the use of tax dollars to pay for abortion related procedures. However I believe that if the parents have consented to the donation and an embryo cannot be adopted and would otherwise be destroyed; the law should always favor life and permit the donation of these embryos in a way that might save someone else's life, just as the law permits organ donations to help save lives.

Last year, I wrote a letter to President George W. Bush asking him to amend his Executive Order placing a moratorium on the extraction of stem cells, allowing researchers to have access to the existing 78 stem cell lines. I have attached my letter (www.culberson.house.gov/media/pdfs/stemcell.pdf) to the President for your review. As you probably know, not all of the original 78 stem cell lines turned out to be viable and I believe the president should amend his order so that his original intent is fulfilled. As we debated the merits of H.R. 810, since it contained no limit on the number of stem cells that could be made available for medical researchers, the bill would have created an atmosphere encouraging the production and harvesting of human embryos like a crop of corn, which is unacceptable to me.

Even though the bill contains a prohibition against financial incentives being used to encourage parents or clinics to produce embryos, the absence of a limit or cap on the number of embryos that can be used for research will inevitably create circumstances where embryos could be produced for research in large numbers. This is a very disturbing moral and ethical direction for our country to take and I cannot, in good conscience, participate in enacting laws that create this atmosphere.

However, I have great faith in the innovative genius of American scientists and medical researchers. Despite the fact that the medical benefits of embryonic stem cell research do not, at present, appear to be as potentially productive as the work being done with adult stem cells, I recognize that the federal government has a fundamental responsibility to make a strong financial investment in basic medical and scientific research, much of which may wind up running down rabbit trails or dead ends. It is essential for the federal government to fund this pure basic medical and scientific research because the private sector tends to only invest in research that has a strong degree of certainty in its ultimate success. If the federal government does not step up and make consistent, long-range, strong investments in medical and scientific research, much of the most important work may never get done or will be delayed unnecessarily.

I also recognize that lives may be saved by the use of donated embryonic stem cells that are otherwise certain to be destroyed. Therefore, I have written a letter to the authors of H.R. 810 in the House and Senate and to President Bush asking them to consider amending this legislation so that it would apply only to the existing stock of human embryos that are in storage at the time the bill is signed into law. Since there are approximately 400,000 embryos in existence today that are in storage or in clinics, and I understand that less than 5 % of these could potentially be viable, if this change in H.R. 810 were made, it would avoid creating an atmosphere encouraging the future production of human embryos like a marketable commodity, and would be consistent with my belief that the law should always favor life and embryos that would otherwise be discarded and cannot be adopted should be made available for donation to research to potentially save a life if the parent's consent. This change in law would make hundreds or thousands of embryos that would otherwise be destroyed available for research to save lives, and since the stem cells by definition can divide and multiply in perpetuity, there should be more than enough stem cells to do the basic research necessary to establish which research work is a dead end and which would be productive. The private sector could then step in and pick up the work that appears to be the most promising and the federal government's role would have been fulfilled and the law would not encourage or authorize the production and harvesting of human embryos in the future.

In fact, I've just returned from a meeting with our Senator, Kay Bailey Hutchison, and she was already thinking along the same lines. We agreed it would be pertinent to offer an amendment in the Senate to H.R. 810 which would limit its application to the embryos in existence on the date the bill is signed into law. Senator Hutchison agrees that we should not create an environment that encourages the production and harvesting of human embryos, but that if we limited the bill to those in existence on the date of enactment, this might produce the compromise that everyone is looking for. I sincerely hope that this is the case. I told her that if she is successful in amending the bill in this way that I would vote for it in the House when it returns from the Senate.

In the meantime, I have co-authored legislation with Congressman Joe Barton of Texas to create a cord blood stem cell bank which has immediate promise to treat and cure many different diseases, and a version of the bill has also passed the House of Representatives. I also co-authored a bill with Congressman Roscoe Bartlett of Maryland which would authorize research into a procedure now used for genetic testing of human embryos in which a single cell is removed from any blastocyst or earlier stage embryos without harming their development. This procedure is discussed in an article in the journal Science from December 24, 2004. As the President's Council on Bioethics reported in its White Paper dated May 2005, on page 24, "blastomere extraction from living IVF embryos is currently performed to conduct what is called preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD). PGD is a procedure increasingly used in conjunction with assisted reproductive technologies to test IVF embryos for genetic and chromosomal abnormalities prior to the uterine transfer prior to beginning a pregnancy.

I hope that this discussion answers your questions and concerns about this complex and emotional issue. Based on my family's genetic history, it is highly likely that I will develop Parkinson's disease as I grow older and I have many close friends who have children or family members who are afflicted with diabetes and other diseases that could be treated or cured as a result of research into embryonic stem cells. As a member of the Appropriations Committee, I will always do everything I can to be fiscally conservative and work towards balancing the budget and paying off the national debt. I consider investment in medical and scientific research and in our nation space program to be as important to national security for the long-term as the short-term investments we make in national defense through the Pentagon year-to-year.

This is a difficult issue; however, by applying core principles that I have always believed in throughout my life, I believe I have identified a good compromise solution that continues our nation's important tradition of enacting laws that respect preserve life while encouraging and supporting innovative medical and scientific research that holds great promise for the future. Thank you for entrusting me with the privilege of representing you in the United States Congress.

Sincerely,
John Culberson