Senate to tackle stem-cell issue

WASHINGTON — Before Sept. 11 changed everything, President Bush wrestled publicly with the issue of embryonic stem-cell research, then opened the door to federal financing for the science in the first major decision of his administration.

Five years later, the stem-cell debate is about to thrust Bush into a decision that could lead to another first for him: a legislative veto.

On Monday, the Senate will take up a House-approved measure that would loosen the carefully calibrated research restrictions that Bush outlined on Aug. 9, 2001, in his first prime-time television address. If the bill passes, as expected, Bush says he will veto it, making good on a promise he made five days after that speech.

"I spent a lot of time on the subject," Bush said at the time. "I laid out the policy I think is right for America. And I'm not going to change my mind."

Veto threat reiterated

His chief political adviser, Karl Rove, reiterated the veto threat last week. That keeps Bush in good stead with religious conservatives who make up a key part of his base, but at odds with other leading Republicans, including Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist of Tennessee, who is a heart-lung surgeon and has pushed to bring the bill to a vote.

"I think [Bush] has gotten some advice from the beginning from his advisers, and he knows that not to stick with that advice just means a lot of extra criticism," said Sen. Orrin Hatch of Utah, a leading Republican supporter of embryonic stem-cell research. "I have high hopes that down the road, we'll be able to convince him that he's on the wrong side of this issue."

The bill would expand Bush's policy by allowing the government to pay for studies on stem-cell colonies, or lines, derived from embryos in storage at fertility clinics and scheduled for destruction. The policy now allows financing only on lines created before Aug. 9, 2001, Bush has said, so as not to encourage further destruction of embryos.

This week's reprise of a debate that Bush thought he had put to rest is exposing deep fissures among Republicans. Polls show a majority of Americans back the research, and stem cells figure prominently in several key races in November.

Backing of ex-first lady

Nancy Reagan became an advocate while caring for her husband, the late former President Reagan, who suffered from Alzheimer's disease. The former first lady called undecided senators last week to urge them to vote for the bill.

The Senate will debate the bill Monday and vote Tuesday. Under terms of a deal worked out with Democrats, the bill will need 67 ayes to pass, a count most observers think will be achieved.

While the Senate has become more conservative since the 2004 elections, including staunch abortion opponents such as Sens. John Thune of South Dakota and Tom Coburn of Oklahoma, Republicans across the spectrum, from Sen. John Warner of Virginia to Sen. Gordon Smith of Oregon, have signed on to the bill.

The Senate also will vote on two other bills — one aimed at preventing abuses in fetal research and one encouraging a search for nonembryonic stem cells that might have the same potential as embryonic cells.

Both are expected to pass easily and to be passed by the House on Wednesday and Thursday, congressional aides said. A Bush veto could come as early as Thursday, aides said.

The House could follow by Friday with a bid to override that veto. Current head counts suggest an override attempt would fail. If so, the bill would be dead without the Senate reconsidering the issue.

Some, like Frist, seem resigned to a veto. "I have not tried to lobby him," Frist said.

Others have, with little success. Hatch said he had tried indirectly, asking mutual friends to raise the issue with Bush. Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., the lead Senate sponsor of the bill, said he had brought up the issue "when I've been alone with him, on the plane or in the car."

The Republican sponsor of the bill in the House, Rep. Michael Castle of Delaware, and his Democratic co-sponsor, Rep. Diana DeGette of Colorado, asked in June to meet with Bush. They got a note back last week saying the president did not have time.

"I feel like the Titanic — somebody better throw me a lifeline real fast," said Castle, who has pressed the issue for years. "... I've been through a lot of political battles, but I don't know quite how to turn this one around."

The embryonic stem-cell debate has yielded a complex collision of politics, religion and science since 1998, when James Thomson, a developmental biologist at the University of Wisconsin, became the first person to isolate the cells from human embryos.

Because the cells have the potential to grow into any tissue or organ in the body, scientists think they hold great promise for treatments and cures.

But because human embryos are destroyed in extracting the stem cells, the studies draw intense objections from abortion opponents, including leaders of the Roman Catholic Church.

"It's a very clear issue to the pro-life community," said Sen. Sam Brownback, R-Kan., a leading opponent of the research. "Is the youngest human a person or a piece of property?"

Brownback and other opponents argue that adult stem-cell research, in which cells are drawn from blood and bone marrow rather than from embryos, is more ethical and has yielded encouraging results. But scientists say embryonic stem-cell research holds far greater potential.

Scientists, including many outside the United States, have grown new lines that are more robust and easier to analyze.

Embryos for research

Douglas Melton, director of the Harvard Stem Cell Institute, said he had developed 30 such lines, all from embryos collected for in vitro fertilization that would have been destroyed.

"Everything we've learned suggests that the goal of using stem cells to learn about disease and treat disease is very real and promising," Melton said. "We haven't learned anything that makes us think this won't work, but it's going to take time and resources."

Details on the timing of the votes and Bush's expected veto were provided by The Washington Post.