From: Subject: Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2003 05:27:20 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Location: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/C?r108:./temp/~r108tg491B X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 HUMAN CLONING PROHIBITION ACT OF 2003 -- (House of = Representatives -=20 February 27, 2003)

[Page: H1397]
---

Mrs. MYRICK. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the = Committee on=20 Rules, I call up House Resolution 105 and ask for its immediate = consideration.=20

The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:=20

H. Res. 105=20

Resolved, That at any time after the = adoption of=20 this resolution the Speaker may, pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule XVIII, = declare=20 the House resolved into the Committee of the Whole House on the state of = the=20 Union for consideration of the bill (H.R. 534) to amend title 18, United = States=20 Code, to prohibit human cloning. The first reading of the bill shall be=20 dispensed with. All points of order against consideration of the bill = are=20 waived. General debate shall be confined to the bill and shall not = exceed one=20 hour equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority = member=20 of the Committee on the Judiciary. After general debate the bill shall = be=20 considered for amendment under the five-minute rule. The bill shall be=20 considered as read. No amendment shall be in order except those printed = in the=20 report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution. Each = amendment=20 may be offered only in the order printed in the report, may be offered = only by a=20 Member designated in the report, shall be considered as read, shall be = debatable=20 for the time specified in the report equally divided and controlled by = the=20 proponent and an opponent, and shall not be subject to amendment. All = points of=20 order against such amendments are waived. At the conclusion of = consideration of=20 the bill for amendment the Committee shall rise and report the bill to = the House=20 with such amendments as may have been adopted. The previous question = shall be=20 considered as ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to final = passage=20 without intervening motion except one motion to recommit with or without = instructions.

The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Sweeney). The = gentlewoman from North Carolina (Mrs. Myrick) is recognized for = 1 hour.=20

Mrs. MYRICK. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate = only, I=20 yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr.=20 McGovern), pending which I yield myself such time as I may = consume.=20 During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the = purpose of=20 debate only.=20

On Wednesday, the Committee on Rules met and = granted a=20 structured rule for H.R. 534, the Human Cloning Prohibition Act. As an = original=20 cosponsor of this legislation, I am very pleased to see it is one of the = first=20 top priorities of the House of Representatives.=20

Mr. Speaker, this is a fair rule which will permit = a=20 thorough discussion of all of the relevant issues. The first of these = issues is=20 the Greenwood substitute which allows human cloning for medical = purposes.=20

I personally oppose the Greenwood amendment because = it is=20 wrong to create human embryo farms, even for scientific research.=20

Research cloning would contradict the most = fundamental=20 principle of medical ethics, that no human life should be exploited or=20 extinguished for the benefit of another. Anything other than a total ban = on=20 human cloning would be virtually impossible to enforce.=20

I understand there is no way to control actual=20 implementation of these fetuses into a woman's uterus, so cloning of = children=20 could still happen.=20

The Justice Department submitted testimony = explaining that=20 once countless human embryos are created by=20

[Page: H1398]

cloning, there would be no = practical way to=20 enforce the prohibition on transferring such embryos into wombs.=20

The Committee on Rules, though, recognizes that the = gentleman from Pennsylvania's proposal is the leading alternative to the = ban on=20 cloning. And because we are aiming for a fair and thorough debate, we = should=20 make it in order on the House floor.=20

Human cloning is a deeply troubling issue to me and = to most=20 Americans. Life is a creation, not a commodity.=20

I also agreed with President Bush when he said that = science=20 has set before us decisions of immense consequence. We can pursue = medical=20 research with a clear sense of moral purpose, or we can travel without = an=20 ethical compass into a world we could live to regret.=20

Science now presses forward with this issue of = human=20 cloning. How we answer the issue of human cloning will place us on one = path or=20 the other.=20

I spent a lot of time considering this issue = because it is=20 so complex, and I have decided to once again vote to ban human cloning. = It is=20 simply wrong to clone human beings.=20

It is wrong to create fully-grown, tailor-made = cloned=20 babies, and it is wrong to clone human embryos to experiment on and = destroy=20 them. Anything other than a ban on human cloning would license the most = ghoulish=20 and dangerous enterprise in human history. Some of us can still remember = how the=20 world was repulsed during and after World War II by the experiments = conducted by=20 the Nazis during the war. How is this different?=20

Congress must act now. We can no longer wait for = another=20 biotech company to claim that they have produced cloned children, = despite the=20 fact that laboratory cloning of animals has led to spontaneous abortions = and=20 terrible, terrible abnormalities.=20

Congress will not face a weightier issue than the = ethics of=20 human cloning, and Congress should not run away from this problem. It is = our job=20 to address such pressing moral dilemmas, and it is our job to do so in a = deliberative way. That is what we will do today.=20

To that end, I urge my colleagues to support the = rule and=20 the underlying bill.=20

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.=20

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank = the=20 gentlewoman from North Carolina for yielding me this time, and I yield = myself=20 such time as I may consume.=20

(Mr. McGOVERN asked and was given = permission to=20 revise and extend his remarks.)=20

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, let me begin by = making=20 clear that I believe human cloning is morally and ethically wrong. Every = Member=20 of this body is opposed to cloning a human being, and the American = people are=20 unified in their opposition to human cloning. Unfortunately, this debate = is not=20 about making it illegal to clone a human being; rather, it is about = outlawing=20 cutting-edge research that could one day save and improve lives.=20

The bill we are considering today, the so-called = Human=20 Cloning Prohibition Act of 2003, will jail scientists for conducting = therapeutic=20 research. This bill, if enacted, will close the door to important = research that=20 one day could result in treatments or cures for such diseases as = Parkinson's,=20 Alzheimer's, and diabetes. If a drug or treatment for diseases like = Alzheimer's=20 or Parkinson's is developed in another country using therapeutic = cloning, that=20 treatment will not be available to patients in the United States. Think = about=20 it. This bill would actually deny Americans treatments for debilitating=20 diseases. That strikes me as not only wrong, but cruel.=20

It is important to make clear that we are not = debating=20 whether or not Federal funds can be used for stem cell research. The = President=20 made that decision in 2001. Based on that decision, a private company = can=20 conduct stem cell research if it uses its own funds, or companies can = conduct=20 stem cell research with Federal funds if they follow very strict = guidelines.=20 While this bill does not deal with this issue, it is important to note = that stem=20 cells are at the heart of the therapeutic cloning debate.=20

Stem cells were only discovered in 1998. The = promises for=20 treatments and cures from stem cell research may not be realized for 15 = to 20=20 years, but the gains will be enormous. The research of today will result = in the=20 cures of tomorrow.=20

Now, today, scientists say therapeutic cloning is = the best=20 way to produce the stem cells that could lead to breakthrough = discoveries.=20 Through stem cell research, scientists might one day help a person with = a spinal=20 cord injury walk again. How can this body ban this promising endeavor to = end=20 human suffering?=20

Scientists are so important to this debate. They = are the=20 experts, and this body should listen when they speak.=20

In 1863, President Abraham Lincoln created the = National=20 Academy of Sciences so that a group of scientists could advise Congress = and the=20 administration on the complex scientific issues facing our country. Mr. = Speaker,=20 140 years later, the party of Lincoln brings before this body = legislation that=20 ignores the findings or recommendations of this respected group of = scientists.=20

The academy, in a February 2002 report, declared = that=20 therapeutic cloning has scientific potential and should be allowed to = continue.=20 Additionally, the National Institutes of Health and 40 Nobel Laureates = attest=20 the value of this important research.=20

Former President Gerald Ford, a Republican, and = former=20 President Jimmy Carter, a Democrat, also publicly support this research. =

So does former First Lady Nancy Reagan. Her = husband, former=20 President Ronald Reagan, suffers from Alzheimer's disease. This research = may=20 hold the key to treating or even curing that disease. But if this bill = is=20 endorsed today, it would deny the Reagans and millions of other families = any=20 benefit from this research. Mrs. Reagan's views should be heard by this = body,=20 and I will read her letter of support into the RECORD, a letter = she sent=20 to the other Chamber. I want to read it so that my colleagues can hear = her=20 eloquent words.=20

[Time: 13:15]

She writes, ``As you may know, Ronnie will observe = his 92nd=20 birthday soon. In earlier times, we would have been able to celebrate = that day=20 with great joy and wonderful memories of our life together. Now, while I = can=20 draw strength from these memories, I do it alone, as Ronnie struggles in = a world=20 unknown to me or the scientists who devote their life to Alzheimer's = research.=20 Because of this, I am determined to do what I can to save other families = from=20 this pain. I am writing, therefore, to offer my support for stem cell = research=20 and to tell you I'm in favor of new legislation to allow the ethical use = of=20 therapeutic cloning.=20

``Like you, I support a complete ban on = reproductive=20 cloning. However, I believe that embryonic stem cell research under = appropriate=20 guidelines may provide our scientists with many answers that are now = beyond our=20 grasp. There are so many diseases that can be cured, or at least helped, = that we=20 cannot turn our back on this. We have lost so much time already. I = cannot bear=20 to lose any more. Sincerely, Nancy.''=20

Mr. Speaker, I could not have said it better than = Mrs.=20 Reagan. Mrs. Reagan makes a powerful moral argument that we should not = put up a=20 roadblock to close this promising avenue of research.=20

We talk a lot about morality in this body. For the = life of=20 me, I cannot see how it is moral to look into the eyes of someone = suffering from=20 Alzheimer's or Parkinson's and say, we are going to stand in the way of=20 something that has the potential to save your life, or to tell them that = even if=20 a breakthrough treatment is available in Europe or elsewhere, they are = not=20 allowed to have it.=20

This debate is about improving and saving millions = of lives=20 in this country. It is about whether we should jail scientists who are = trying to=20 save the lives of people who suffer from such debilitating diseases as=20 Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, diabetes, and so many other diseases.=20

Let us do the right thing: Vote for the Greenwood=20 substitute, and if that fails, vote against the Weldon bill.=20

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.=20

Mrs. MYRICK. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 1/4 minutes to = the=20 gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Pitts).=20

Mr. PITTS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong = support of=20 H.R. 534 and the rule for the Human Cloning Prohibition Act of 2003. I = thank the=20 gentleman=20

[Page: H1399]

from Florida for his principled = leadership on=20 this issue.=20

The history of cloning is replete with defects, = deformity,=20 and death. Dolly the sheep was the 277th try. By now, everyone knows of = the=20 euthanized death of Dolly. She died on Valentine's Day a couple of weeks = ago at=20 the age of 6, half the normal life expectancy for sheep.=20

Alan Coleman, a Singapore-based scientist who = helped clone=20 Dolly, said, ``I think it highlights more than ever the foolishness of = those who=20 want to legalize human cloning. In the case of humans, it would be = scandalous to=20 go ahead, given our knowledge about the long-term effects of cloning.''=20

If cloning is not safe for animals, how can it be = good for=20 humans? President Reagan said in 1983 that every legislator, every = doctor, every=20 citizen, needs to recognize that the real issue is whether to affirm and = protect=20 the sanctity of all human life or whether to embrace an ethic where some = human=20 lives are valued and others are not. As a Nation we must choose between = the=20 sanctity-of-life ethic and the quality-of-life ethic.=20

If we allow the therapeutic cloning of human = embryos for=20 experimentation, we will devalue the entire system of ethics of this = country. We=20 will have endorsed the idea that it is okay to treat human life like a=20 commodity.=20

I am not willing to make that choice. I am not = willing to=20 say that we should create a class of human beings to be used as human = guinea=20 pigs and laboratory rats. We have seen that happen before in Nazi = Germany with=20 experiments on concentration camp victims, and in Tuskegee, Alabama, = where our=20 own U.S. Government experimented on African Americans, infecting them = with=20 syphilis in search of a cure.=20

We find these stories morally abhorrent. But what = will=20 history say about us if we fail to learn the lessons of the past and if = we=20 knowingly do the same thing to tiny little humans again?=20

The Greenwood substitute would allow the creation = of cloned=20 human embryos as long as the embryo is destroyed within 14 days and = never=20 implanted in the womb. Even that phony restriction is lifted within 10 = years of=20 enactment. It will result in the creation of a human embryo.=20

We need to stop playing word games and admit that = serious=20 issues are at stake here. This vote will determine whether we as a = Nation will=20 affirm the dignity of human life or reject it. Support the Weldon-Stupak = bill.=20

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 = minutes to=20 the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Doggett).=20

Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, this bill is part of a = broader,=20 tragic political agenda to stymie good science with scare tactics. It = fails=20 totally to distinguish between cloning or reproducing human beings--a = frightful=20 prospect that all of us reject--and therapeutic cloning, which someday = could=20 save the lives of millions.=20

The therapeutic form, the transplanting of a = patient's DNA=20 into an unfertilized egg in order to grow stem cells, could cure = devastating=20 diseases. The promise of this technology would be that the patient's = body=20 accepts the cells from transplantation without immuno-suppressant drugs. = These=20 cells are not transplanted into a woman's womb. In what is deliberate=20 overreaching, this bill bans somatic cell nuclear transfer, which = produces only=20 stem cells, not babies.=20

First, we Americans were told to use duct tape to = seal up=20 our rooms. Now, with this bill, the Republican leadership places duct = tape over=20 the microscopes of dedicated medical scientists who are leading the = effort to=20 find the cures for diabetes, Alzheimer's, ALS, Parkinson's, cancer, = spinal cord=20 injuries and cystic fibrosis.=20

At a time when we are alarmed daily by the = possibility of=20 biological attacks from afar, this bill represents a very real and = present=20 biological attack on the victims of these tragic diseases, diseases that = strike=20 Americans down in a nonpartisan manner. They deserve a nonpartisan = solution.=20

For most parents, it is traumatic enough to take a = child to=20 the hospital for a tonsillectomy or a broken bone. How cruel that for = lingering=20 diseases that can slowly drain the happiness, the energy, and the life = from a=20 child, one of the best hopes for treatment that we have would be = completely=20 denied by this bill.=20

I think of the Austin mother who wrote to me about = her=20 diabetic five-year-old. She told of her baby who suffered through 4 to 8 = insulin=20 shots a day. Now, as a toddler, she undergoes 10 to 15 pricks a day to = test her=20 blood sugar. Her mom wrote: ``Our daughter is a lively girl who is = optimistic by=20 nature. We would like to see this horrible disease cured before her = optimism=20 fades.''=20

Let us not put politics over life-saving science. = The=20 restrictions in this bill are truly unprecedented. It bans private as = well as=20 public research. It says even to the victim of disease, ``if you go = abroad,''=20 where medical science will certainly move if this tragic bill is = adopted, ``you=20 are not only getting treatment, you are getting a jail term, because you = are a=20 criminal under this bill for seeking a cure or treatment for your = disease.''=20

Restrictive federal regulations already deny = sufficient=20 stem cell lines to conduct essential research. This bill does more than = tie the=20 hands of our best scientists; it steals precious time that victims do = not have;=20 it robs them of hope; it is, for too many, a death sentence.=20

Those innocent victims are not criminals; this bill = is. Do=20 not make Americans choose between health and their homeland. Vote to end = suffering. Vote for hope. Vote ``no.''=20

Mrs. MYRICK. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1 = minute to=20 the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Renzi).=20

Mr. RENZI. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for = yielding time to me.=20

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the Human = Cloning=20 Prohibition Act of 2003, H.R. 534, reintroduced by the gentleman from=20 Pennsylvania (Mr. Weldon) and the gentleman from Michigan (Mr.=20 Stupak). The issue here is human cloning. The issue has to do = with us=20 playing God and allowing human embryos to be produced.=20

Make no mistake about it, we are compassionate = Americans.=20 We care about pain and suffering, we care about curing diseases; but at = the cost=20 of creating human life, human embryos?=20

There is a claim that cancer, diabetes, and other = diseases=20 will be cured. I would go as far as to say in the medical community, = with=20 safeguards against terrorists, we can identify biological weapons. In my = district sits one of the finest anthrax labs in the world that can = already=20 identify these types of dangerous pathogens. We do not need human = cloning to=20 identify those signatures that exist within those pathogens.=20

As researchers develop artificial wombs, if you are = voting=20 for the Greenwood substitute, after 10 years it would allow scientists = the legal=20 protection to harvest embryos and to grow human fetuses. It is essential = that,=20 whether for research or reproduction, we not allow people to create = human life.=20

Join me in voting in favor of final passage of the=20 Weldon-Stupak bill.=20

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 = minutes to=20 the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Capps).=20

Mrs. CAPPS. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to = the rule=20 and to the underlying bill. No one in Congress supports cloning a human = being,=20 but we cannot afford to block research into important scientific areas = that may=20 have critical medical benefits to American citizens.=20

The millions who are currently suffering from = diseases that=20 have no cures, Parkinson's, cancer, Alzheimer's, diabetes, spinal cord = injuries,=20 and their families, these millions are desperately hoping that new = medical=20 research can provide them relief.=20

The best hope for many of these people may lie with = research into somatic cell nuclear transfer or therapeutic cloning. This = process=20 may allow doctors and scientists to duplicate human stem cells to create = medical=20 therapies for diseases, therapies that will not be rejected by patients' = bodies.=20 This research and these therapies do not require or result in a cloned = human=20 being; but the bill before us would ban that research and take away hope = for=20 millions of Americans, just because of fear of the unknown.=20

We can increase understanding of the science = involved here=20 and at the same time provide protections against its untoward use. = Congress=20 should take its time and consider these issues. We should ban human = cloning, as=20 we have, and allow research to go forward. We should set the ethical = parameters=20 for scientific research. That is our job, set these parameters which = will lead=20 to saving lives and restoring health.=20

[Page: H1400]

On behalf of those millions who suffer and wait and = hope, I=20 urge my colleagues to vote against the Weldon bill and to vote for the = Greenwood=20 amendment.=20

Mrs. MYRICK. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the=20 gentlewoman from Virginia (Mrs. Jo Ann Davis).=20

Mrs. JO ANN DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I rise = today in=20 support of the rule. In doing so, I would like to bring to light one of = the most=20 dangerous consequences of voting for human cloning, both reproductive = and=20 therapeutic. That is the exploitation of women.=20

Women of lower economic means are particular = targets for=20 exploitation. Advanced Cell Technologies paid $3,500 to $4,000 to each = woman who=20 donated their eggs for the failed human cloning experiments. Because of = the many=20 risks associated with this procedure, it will mostly be women of little = means=20 who will volunteer to sell their eggs.=20

In order to generate enough cloned embryos to carry = out=20 this research, thousands of eggs will need to be solicited from numerous = women.=20 It takes about 50 eggs to get one viable cloned embryo. Just to treat = the 16=20 million Parkinson's patients, it is estimated that 800 million human = eggs would=20 be needed from a minimum of 80 million women of childbearing age.=20

I implore my colleagues to vote for the health and=20 well-being of women. Please vote for the rule and for the Weldon-Stupak = bill.=20

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 = minutes to=20 the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Bell).=20

Mr. BELL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition = to H.R.=20 534 and in support of the bipartisan substitute.=20

I lost my mother in 1999, but really I lost her = twice. The=20 first time was when she was suffering from a cruel, mind-altering = disease that=20 has afflicted millions of American families, a disease known as = Parkinson's. For=20 my mom, each of the 10 years she spent fighting Parkinson's disease was = a little=20 more difficult than the one before, until finally her body just could = not fight=20 anymore.=20

After losing my mother that way, I will do all I = can to=20 help find a cure for diseases like Parkinson's. There are tens of = millions of=20 Americans that feel the same way because of someone they have lost in = their=20 lives, because fighting for a cure is the right thing to do.=20

I do not know how I am going to explain to my = constituents=20 that my colleagues in the House decided not to allow scientists to use = the vast=20 technology at our disposal to cure their mother's Parkinson's disease or = their=20 grandmother's Alzheimer's or their husband's diabetes, because that is = exactly=20 what stem cell research and therapeutic cloning are going to do: cure = disease=20 and save lives.=20

[Time: 13:30]

Stem cell research is no different than the = discovery of=20 penicillin or the invention of the Hart pump or the vaccine for polio. = It is=20 simply the next step in modern medicine. When it comes down to it, = American=20 families will be the victims of H.R. 534. The price of this bill will be = the=20 lives of children, grandchildren, the mothers and fathers that each of = us=20 cherishes, all who we were able, but not willing, to save. And why?=20

We all oppose human cloning. That is not the issue. = That is=20 not what I am talking about. Let us be perfectly clear. Therapeutic = cloning is=20 in no way, shape or form the same as human cloning. I oppose human = cloning as do=20 most Members of this House. But we are not talking about simply a ban on = human=20 cloning, but a ban on therapeutic cloning as well, a process where there = is no=20 fertilization, no implantation, no pregnancy and no chance for a child = to be=20 produced whatsoever.=20

Under the proposed bill, therapeutic cloning would = be=20 banned and a research process that takes place in a petri dish would be=20 criminalized. A process that provides hope, and someday a cure for = millions of=20 Americans, would be criminalized.=20

So for the millions of us who are all too familiar = with the=20 pain and suffering brought on by diseases like Parkinson's, Alzheimer's, = and=20 diabetes, for those of us who pray every night that a cure can be found, = my=20 distinguished colleagues on both sides of the aisle should vote against = H.R. 534=20 and support the bipartisan substitute.=20

Mrs. MYRICK. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the=20 gentlewoman from Colorado (Mrs. Musgrave).=20

(Mrs. MUSGRAVE asked and was given = permission to=20 revise and extend her remarks.)=20

Mrs. MUSGRAVE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express = my=20 strong support for the Weldon-Stupak Human Cloning Prohibition Act. The = passage=20 of this bill is of utmost urgency as scientists in this country and = around the=20 world are making dangerous advances towards the creation of a cloned = human=20 being.=20

The science of human cloning may be difficult to = explain=20 and to understand to those of us who are not scientists, but its = immorality is=20 not without question. You do not have to be a scientist to know this is = wrong.=20 Whether produced for the intention of human reproduction or for the = purpose of=20 medical research, the fact remains the same: human cloning is simply = wrong. It=20 invariably requires the creation and killing of numerous human lives in = the=20 effort to produce either cloned cells for the purpose of research or = cloned=20 human beings.=20

Numerous ethical questions arise. Who, for example, = would=20 be the parents of a cloned human being? What rights would they have? And = what=20 about the potential to create human-animal hybrids through the = transferring of=20 human nuclear material into animal eggs? If we open the door to human = cloning,=20 these ethical problems will be unavoidable. Additionally, cloning = cheapens all=20 human life by making it a commodity, an object to tinker with, to alter, = to=20 change to a scientist's preset specifications. Manipulating the genetic = outcomes=20 of human reproduction render certain people desirable and others not. = How then=20 will society view these people determined less desirable? Are they of = less human=20 value?=20

In fact, if we do not enact a ban on human cloning, = these=20 situations I have described are just a few of the scenarios we will face = in the=20 near future. As one of the Nation's leading bioethicists, Dr. Leon Kass, = has=20 said, ``We are compelled to decide nothing less than whether human = procreation=20 is going to remain human, whether children are going to be made to order = rather=20 than begotten, and whether we wish to say yes in principle to the road = that=20 leads to the dehumanized hell of `Brave New World.' ''=20

The American people have spoken loud and clear on = their=20 view on this issue, as has the scientific community, our President, and = this=20 body of Congress last year. The national consensus is evident. Human = cloning for=20 any reason, whether for research or reproduction, should be prohibited.=20

Please join me in voting ``yes'' on the = Weldon-Stupak bill=20 and ``no'' on the Greenwood substitute.=20

NATIONAL RIGHT TO LIFE=20

COMMITTEE, INC.,=20

February 10, 2003.=20

Congress Resumes Action on Human Cloning Legislation this Week, = As=20 Supporters of Cloning Human Embryos Try to Fool Lawmakers, Journalists, = and the=20 Public with Deceptive ``Egg-Speak''

INTRODUCTION

Congress is renewing consideration of whether to = ban all=20 human cloning, as a number of other major nations have already done. On=20 Wednesday, February 12, the House Judiciary Committee will act on the=20 Weldon-Stupak bill (H.R. 534). This bill, which is backed by President = Bush,=20 would ban the creation of human embryos by cloning. In the Senate, the = same=20 policy is embodied in the Brownback-Landrieu bill (S. 245).=20

Those who favor cloning human embryos are proposing = competing legislation that would allow the mass cloning of human embryos = to be=20 killed in research, but attempt to ban implantation of such an embryo in = a womb.=20 In the House, we expect that this ``clone and kill'' approach will be = advanced=20 by Rep. Jim Greeenwood (R-Pa.), who offered such a proposal in 2001. In = the=20 Senate, a cloning-embryos-for-research bill has been introduced by = Senator Orrin=20 Hatch (R-Utah), Dianne Feinstein (D-Ca.), and others as S. 303.=20

In recent days, a number of news outlets have = transmitted=20 inaccurate reports about what these competing bills would each allow and = forbid--reports that obscure what the argument is really about. These = points of=20 confusion are discussed in more detail below.=20

PRESIDENT BUSH'S POSITION

[Page: H1401]

speech, the President said, = ``Because no human=20 life should be started or ended as the object of an experiment, I ask = you to set=20 a high standard for humanity, and pass a law against all human = cloning.'' In a=20 speech on human cloning last year, President Bush warned that unless = such=20 legislation is enacted, human ``embryo farms'' will be established in = the United=20 States. (See = www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/04/print/2002410-4.html)=20

THE SITUATION IN CONGRESS

The House Judiciary Committee is scheduled to mark = up the=20 Weldon-Stupak bill (H.R. 534) on Wednesday, February 12, at 10:15 a.m., = at 2141=20 Rayburn House Office Building. Once the committee completes its work, = the full=20 House could take up the bill at any time. H.R. 534 is nearly identical = to the=20 measure that passed the House on July 31, 2001, by lopsided bipartisan = vote of=20 265-162 (roll call no. 304). When the House considered the issue on that = occasion, it decisively rejected (249-178) a substitute amendment, the=20 Greenwood-Deutsch Amendment, that would have allowed the cloning of = human=20 embryos for research (roll call no. 302)=20

The Senate companion to the Weldon-Stupak bill, the = Brownback-Landrieu bill (S. 245), currently has 26 cosponsors. A = radically=20 different measure, the Hatch-Feinstein bill (S. 303), has only eight = cosponsors,=20 but it has considerable additional support, mostly among Senate = Democrats.=20

The Brownback-Landrieu bill has been referred to = the=20 Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP), which is = chaired by=20 Senator Judd Gregg (R-NH), who was a cosponsor of the bill in the 107th=20 Congress. The Hatch-Feinstein bill has been referred to the Senate = Judiciary=20 Committee, which Hatch chairs. Whatever happens in these committees, the = full=20 Senate ultimately will vote on both of these diametrically conflicting=20 approaches.=20

The recently selected Senate Majority Leader, Bill = Frist=20 (R-Tn.), said in a January 12 interview on Fox News Sunday, ``I am = opposed to=20 any time that you create an embryo itself with the purpose being = destruction,=20 and that would include the so-called research cloning. And remember, = research=20 cloning is just that, it's experimental. There's been no demonstrated = benefit of=20 that to date, so I don't think you ought to destroy life. . .''=20

The key differences between the two bills are = discussed=20 below. In many recent news media reports on human cloning issues, the=20 differences have been mischaracterized, and the specific activities that = each=20 bill would allow and prohibit have been widely misunderstood.=20

MISCONCEPTIONS AND FACTS

Misconception: The=20 Brownback-Landrieu/Weldon-Stupak legislation prohibits cloning of human=20 ``cells,'' while the Hatch-Feinstein bill would allow cloning of = ``cells.''=20

Reality: The Brownback-Landrieu bill (S. = 245) and=20 the Weldon-Stupak bill (H.R. 534)-- like their predecessors in the 107th = Congress--explicitly allow ``the use of nuclear transfer or other = cloning=20 techniques to produce molecules, DNA, cells other than human embryos, = tissues,=20 organs, plants, or animals other than humans.'' [Sec. 2 of the bill, at = (d) in=20 H.R. 534 and at (e) in S. 245; boldface added for emphasis] Thus, the = methods=20 currently used to ``clone'' new skin, for example, or to ``clone'' DNA, = are=20 perfectly okay under the Brownback-Landrieu bill. Moreover, any cloning = method=20 that would produce stem cells without first producing and killing a = human=20 embryo--as some researchers have claimed that they eventually will be = able to=20 do--is explicitly permitted by this language. In addition, the=20 Brownback-Landrieu and Weldon-Stupak bills place no restrictions on = research of=20 any kind on human ova (``eggs'').=20

In short, the Brownback/Weldon legislation and the=20 Hatch-Feinstein legislation are alike in that they would both permit = cloning=20 involving merely eggs, cells, or tissues, but they differ on one = profound issue:=20 The Hatch-Feinstein/Greenwood proposals would allow the use of the = somatic cell=20 nuclear transfer (SCNT) process to clone human embryos, and the = Brownback/Weldon=20 legislation would forbid the use of SCNT to clone human embryos.=20

Verbiage by supporters of ``research cloning'' = about=20 ``eggs'' and ``cells'' is intended to conceal what the argument is = really about:=20 whether it should be permitted to clone human embryos.=20

Misconception: So-called ``therapeutic cloning'' = does not=20 involve creating human embryos.=20

Fact: That SCNT using human genetic material will = create a=20 developing embryo of the species Homo sapiens is something that = authorities on=20 all sides agreed on until sometime in 2001, when some of the pro-cloning = forces=20 decided to try to obscure this fact for political purposes. Among those = who=20 clearly affirmed that SCNT will create human embryos were the bioethics = panels=20 of both Presidents Clinton and Bush, the embryo research panel at NIH, = and the=20 chief cloning researchers at Advanced Cell Technology in Massachusetts. = Some=20 samples of such statements, which pre-date the current disinformation = campaign,=20 are posted here: www.nrlc.org/Killing XEmbryos/factsheetembryo.html.=20

The cite just one example here, a group of = scientists,=20 ethicists, and biotechnology executives advocating so-called = ``therapeutic=20 cloning'' and use of human embryos for research--Arthur Caplan of the = University=20 of Pennsylvania, Lee Silver of Princeton University, Ronald Green of = Dartmouth=20 University, and Michael West, Robert Lanza, and Jose Cibelli of Advanced = Cell=20 Technology--wrote in the December 27, 2000 issue of the Journal of the = American=20 Medical Association, ``CRNT [cell replacement through nuclear transfer, = another=20 term for ``therapeutic cloning''] requires the deliberate creation and=20 disaggregation of a human embryo.'' They also wrote, ``..... because = therapeutic=20 cloning requires the creation and disaggregation ex utero of blastocyst = stage=20 embryos, this technique raises complex ethical questions.''=20

In its 2002 report on human cloning, the = President's=20 Council on Bioethics, although divided on policy recommendations, = provided=20 without dissent recommendations regarding the use of honest terminology = in this=20 crucial public policy debate, including acknowledging that successful = SCNT will=20 create human embryos. The Council said, ``The product of `SCNT' is not = only an=20 embryo; it is also a clone, genetically virtually identical to the = individual=20 that was the source of the transferred nucleus, hence an embryonic clone = of the=20 donor.''=20

The Council recommended use of the terms ``cloning = for=20 biomedical research'' and ``cloning to produce children'' to distinguish = between=20 two of the purposes for which human embryos might be cloned. (``Cloning = for=20 research'' and ``cloning for birth'' convey pretty much the same thing.) = The=20 Council's discussion on accurate and neutral terminology is here:=20 www.bioethics.gov/cloningreport/terminology.html.=20

The phrase ``reproductive cloning'' is misleading, = because=20 whenever somatic cell nuclear transfer produces a developing embryo,=20 ``reproduction'' has occurred. The term ``therapeutic cloning'' is = misleading,=20 because no therapies have been demonstrated using cloned embryos (even = in=20 animals, as discussed below), and the process is certainly not = ``therapeutic''=20 for the human embryo who is dissected--which is what the argument is = about.=20

Misconception: The Hatch-Feinstein bill would allow = research only on ``unfertilized eggs up to 14 days.''=20

Reality: As can be confirmed by reference to any = biology=20 text or even any decent dictionary, a human ovum or ``egg'' is, by = definition, a=20 single cell. Moreover, it is a very unusual cell--a gamete cell, which = means it=20 has only 23 chromosomes. An ovum has no sex.=20

As discussed above, once one has a complete nucleus = from=20 any species that is activated (whether by sexual fertilization or by = asexual=20 somatic cell nuclear transfer, SCNT) and developing, then one has a = developing=20 embryo of that species (sheep, cow, Homo sapiens, etc). There is no such = thing=20 in biology or in any dictionary as a human ``egg'' or ``egg cell'' that = has 46=20 chromosomes, is either male or female, and is five days old (consisting = of=20 several hundred cells) or even 14 days old (consisting of thousands of = cells).=20 In short, calling a five-day-old or a two-week-old human embryo an = ``egg'' is an=20 attempt to deceive the public regarding what the policy argument is = really=20 about. We submit that this is not an effort in which responsible = journalists=20 should enlist.=20

The actual text of the Hatch-Feinstein bill coins = the term=20 ``unfertilized blastocyst.'' But ``blastocyst'' is simply a technical = term for=20 an embryo at an early stage of development. As for ``unfertilized,'' = this is=20 just another word trick aimed at the gullible. Of course human embryos = produced=20 by cloning will be ``unfertilized,'' because that is what cloning is: = asexual=20 reproduction--no sperm. Every cloned mammal in the world was = unfertilized from=20 the one-celled embryo stage, and every one of them will be unfertilized = on the=20 day they die. If a human embryo created by cloning instead of = fertilization is=20 implanted in a womb, is born, and lives to be eighty, she will still be=20 unfertilized.=20

Misconception: The Hatch-Feinstein bill is a = compromise=20 that would accomplish what almost everyone agrees on, banning = ``reproductive=20 cloning.''=20

Reality: Far from representing ``common ground,'' = the=20 Hatch-Feinstein bill represents a policy disfavored by most Americans = and=20 strongly opposed by the Bush Administration. It will not become law. But = that=20 does not bother many of its backers, such as the biotechnology industry = lobby,=20 because the primary purpose of the Hatch-Feinstein bill is to impede = enactment=20 of the real ban on human cloning, by providing political cover for = lawmakers who=20 favor allowing the creation of human embryos for research.=20

Notwithstanding the marketing efforts of the = biotechnology=20 industry lobby and its allies, the Hatch-Feinstein bill or the Greenwood = amendment would enact a policy that is far from a consensus = position--indeed, a=20 policy that the substantial majority of Americans oppose. A Gallup poll = in May=20 2002 found that 61 percent of the American people opposed ``cloning of = human=20 embryos for use in medical research'' (34 percent approved), which is = precisely=20 what the Hatch-Feinstein bill is crafted to allow and indeed encourage. = In other=20 polls, substantially higher numbers are opposed when it is explained = that the=20 human embryos will die in the research.=20

The Hatch-Feinstein bill is not a partial solution = or a=20 middle ground. Rather, it is a step in the wrong direction. The = Hatch-Feinstein=20 bill would give a green light to the establishment of human embryo = farms.=20

The ``clone and kill'' approach has already been=20 emphatically rejected by the Bush Administration and by the House of=20 Representatives (in 2001). Secretary of Health and=20

[Page: H1402]

Human Services Tommy Thompson = last year sent a=20 letter to Senator Brownback warning that such a bill would face a = presidential=20 veto. Thompson wrote, ``The President does not believe that = `reproductive' and=20 `research cloning should be treated differently, given that they both = require=20 the creation, exploitation, and destruction of human embryos ..... the=20 Administration could not support any measure that purported to ban=20 `reproductive' cloning while authorizing research cloning, and I would = recommend=20 to the President that he veto such a bill.'' (See www.nrlc.org/Killing=20 XEmbryos/ThompsontoBrownback.pdf).=20

The Hatch-Feinstein bill would give federal law = enforcement=20 agencies responsibility for trying to enforce a ban on implanting a = cloned=20 embryo in a womb--an approach that the Justice Department in 2002 = rejected as=20 unworkable. The Department explained that once large numbers of cloned = human=20 embryos are created, there is no practical way to prevent some of them = from=20 being implanted in wombs, and no remedy to apply after that occurs. The=20 testimony is posted here: www.nrlc,org/killing Xembryos/Justice XDept = Xon=20 Xcloning.pdf.=20

Misconception: The Hatch-Feinstein bill would ``ban = human=20 cloning'' or ``ban the cloning of human beings.''=20

Reality: The Hatch-Feinstein bill does not ban = ``human=20 cloning.'' It bans implanting a cloned human embryo ``into a uterus or = the=20 functional equivalent of a uterus'' (the latter term is not defined), an = act to=20 which criminal penalties are attached. It also attempts to impose a rule = against=20 allowing a cloned human embryo (a so-called ``unfertilized blastocyst'') = to=20 develop past 14 days of age (not counting time frozen). Violations of = this=20 ``14-day rule'' are subject to a civil fine of up to $250,000, and there = is=20 nothing in the bill to prevent the threat of such a fine from being = applied even=20 against a woman who carries an unborn cloned human in utero, perhaps in = an=20 attempt to compel her to procure an abortion.=20

It other words, the bill bans not ``human = cloning,'' but=20 the survival of human clones, which is a very different thing.=20

Any bill that permits cloning (somatic cell nuclear = transfer) with human nuclei does not ``ban human cloning,'' because such = a bill=20 allows the cloning of embryos of the species Homo sapiens, and an embryo = of the=20 species Homo sapiens is human (just as the cloned embryo that was later = born as=20 Dolly the sheep, the first cloned mammal, was always a member of the = species=20 Ovis aries).=20

As to whether a cloned human embryo is to be = regarded as a=20 ``human being,'' we would think that journalists would want to avoid = blatantly=20 taking sides on that question. A statement that the Hatch-Feinstein bill = ``bans=20 the cloning of human beings'' is certainly taking sides on the issue, = because it=20 amounts to a declaration that a two-week-old embryo of the species Homo = sapiens=20 is not a ``human being.'' (if not, what species of being is it?)=20

It appears that President Bush is among those who = recognize=20 cloned human embryos as human beings: in his January 22 statement, the = President=20 said, ``I also urge the Congress to ban all human cloning. We must not = create=20 life to destroy life. Human beings are not research material to be used = in a=20 cruel and reckless experiment.'' [emphasis added]=20

The National Right to Life Committee believes that = if a=20 cloned human being is born, she should have the same status as other = humans--but=20 Senator Hatch and some others apparently are not so sure. In a press = release=20 dated February 5, 2002, Senator Hatch said, ``No doubt somewhere, = some--such as=20 the Raelians--are trying to make a name for themselves and are busy = trying to=20 apply the techniques that gave us Dolly the Sheep to human beings. = Frankly, I am=20 not sure that human being would even be the correct term for such an = individual=20 heretofore unknown in nature.''=20

As Slate.com columnist Will Saletan commented = (``Killing=20 Eve,'' December 31, 2002, http://slate.msn.com/id/2076199/), ``The first = cloned=20 baby--Eve or whoever comes after her--won't be fertilized. If = fertilization is a=20 prerequisite to humanity, as Hatch and Feinstein suggest, that baby will = never=20 be human. You can press the pillow over her face and walk away.'' (See = also:=20 www.nrlc.org/killing Xembryos/arecloneshuman.html).=20

Misconception: Those who favor cloning for research = would=20 never allow clones to develop past two weeks of age.=20

Reality: While the Hatch-Feinstein bill purports to = establish a two-week ``deadline'' for killing human clones, there are=20 substantial reasons to doubt that the biotechnology industry would = support such=20 a limitation in a bill it actually expected to become law. Already, some = policymakers are opening the door to ``fetus farming'' with human = clones.=20

For example, the New Jersey legislature appears = close to=20 giving final approval to a bill that would permit cloned humans to be = grown=20 through any stage of fetal development, even to birth, to obtain tissues = for=20 transplantation, as long as they are not kept alive past the ``newborn'' = stage.=20 (SB 1909, as amended) Four members of the President's Council on = Bioethics wrote=20 to Gov. James McGreevey to warn about the bill's radical implications. = (See=20 www.nationalreview.com/document/document020303c.asp).=20

Last year, researchers reported harvesting tissue = from=20 cloned cows at six and eight weeks of fetal development, and from cloned = mice at=20 the newborn stage. Both studies were widely reported by the news media = as=20 breakthroughs for so-called ``therapeutic cloning.'' Indeed, so far = these are=20 the only two animal studies that have claimed to show ``therapeutic'' = results=20 from cloning.=20

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 = minutes to=20 the distinguished gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Stupak).=20

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for = yielding=20 me time.=20

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of the = rule and=20 H.R. 534, the Weldon-Stupak Human Cloning Prohibition Act.=20

Mr. Speaker, it has been 2 years since we had the = Raelian=20 cult before my committee, the Committee on Energy and Commerce. We = warned people=20 back then it was not a question of if cloning would take place. It was a = question of when. The Raelians have proven us right.=20

Whether or not they can actually clone a human is = besides=20 the point. The point is under current Federal law they can clone a = human. We=20 need to stop this manipulation of human life, and we need to stop it = now. We=20 cannot allow the Greenwood substitute that does allow the cloning of = embryos,=20 yet merely outlaws the implantation. We need to send the strongest = possible=20 message that cloning in any form is unacceptable.=20

The Weldon-Stupak bill is the only bill that does = this. We=20 cannot afford to treat the issue of human embryo cloning lightly, nor = can we=20 treat it without serious debate and deliberation.=20

The need for action is clear. Research firms, = Advance Cell=20 Technology of Massachusetts for one, have already begun cloning embryos = for=20 research purposes. Whatever your belief is, pro-life or pro-choice, the = fact is=20 embryos are either the building block of life or human life itself. We = must ask=20 ourselves what will our message be? What makes up human beings? What is = the=20 human spirit? What moves us? What separates us from animals? That is = what is=20 being debated here today.=20

What message will the United States Congress send? = Will it=20 be a cynical signal that human embryo cloning and destruction is okay,=20 acceptable, even to be encouraged all in the name of science, or will it = be a=20 message urging caution and care? If we allow this research to go forward = unchecked, what will be next? Allowing parents to choose what color hair = and=20 eyes their baby will have?=20

We need to consider all aspects of cloning and not = just=20 what the researchers tell us is good. Opposition to our bill has based = its=20 objections on arguments that we will stifle research, discourage free = thinking,=20 put science back in the dark ages. The Weldon-Stupak bill does nothing = of the=20 sort. It allows animal cloning. It allows tissue cloning. It allows = current stem=20 cell research being done on existing embryos. It allows DNA cloning. How = is this=20 stifling research? The fact is, there is no research being done on = cloned human=20 embryos, so how can we stifle it?=20

And do you know why there is no research being = done?=20 Because the scientists, the same ones that are coming to our offices, = banging on=20 our doors, begging to be allowed to experiment with human embryos, they = do not=20 even know how. They have experimented for years with cloned animal = embryos with=20 very limited success. These scientists who are pushing so hard to be = allowed a=20 free pass for research on what constitutes the very essence of what it = is to be=20 human do not know what goes wrong with cloned animal embryos. And the = horror=20 stories are too many to mention here of deformed mice and deformed sheep = developing from cloned embryos.=20

A prominent researcher working for the bioresearch=20 companies has admitted scientists do not know how or what happens in = cloned=20 embryos allowing these deformities. In fact, he calls the procedure when = an egg=20 reprograms DNA ``magic.''=20

Magic? That is hardly a comforting, hard-hitting = scientific=20 term, but it is accurate. It is magic. Opponents of the bill have said = embryonic=20 research is the Holy Grail of science and holds the key to untold = medical=20 wonders. I say to these opponents, show me your miracles. Show me the = wondrous=20 advances done on animal embryonic cloning. But these opponents cannot = show me=20 these advances because they do not exist.=20

Our ability to delve into the mysteries of life = grows=20 exponentially. All fields of science fuse to enhance our=20

[Page: H1403]

ability to go where we have = never gone before.=20

The question is simply: Just because we can do = something,=20 does that mean we should do it? What is a better path to take, one of = haste and=20 a rush to benefits that are at best years away into the future, = entrusting=20 cloned human embryos to scientists who do not know what they are doing = with=20 cloned animal embryos? Or is it one urging caution, urging a step back, = further=20 deliberation?=20

The human race is not open to experimentation at = any level,=20 even the molecular level. Has the 20th century not shown us of this = folly?=20

Holy Grail? Magic? How about the human soul? = Scientists and=20 medical researchers cannot find it, cannot medically explain it, but = writers=20 write about it. Songwriters sing about it. We believe in it. From the = depths of=20 our souls we know we should ban human cloning. For the sake of our = souls, let us=20 reject the Greenwood substitute and support the Weldon-Stupak bill.=20

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me = time.=20

Mrs. MYRICK. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the=20 gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Terry).=20

(Mr. TERRY asked and was given permission = to=20 revise and extend his remarks.)=20

Mr. TERRY. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of = the=20 rule and the bill.=20

The consequence of allowing human cloning would be = dire.=20 Human embryos would be created for the sole purpose of being = experimented on and=20 killed. Cloned humans would likely have serious defects such as = premature aging=20 which may have led to premature death of Dolly, the cloned sheep. Women = could be=20 exploited through the buying and selling of their eggs for medical = research, and=20 children could be manufactured with specific genetic traits, making them = commodities rather than precious gifts from God.=20

This bill would prevent those horrifying scenarios = from=20 reality. This legislation would ban reproductive cloning and research = cloning,=20 which both involve creation of human life.=20

As elected leaders, we have a responsibility to = safeguard=20 the future of humanity by placing clear, ethical limits on medical = research. Our=20 scientists should concentrate on promising avenues which raise no moral = concerns=20 such as adult stem cell research. Allowing human cloning would only = devalue=20 human life and permit women and children to be exploited.=20

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote in favor = of the=20 rule and H.R. 534.=20

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 = minutes to=20 the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee).=20

(Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas asked and was = given=20 permission to revise and extend her remarks.)=20

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I thank the=20 distinguished gentleman from Massachusetts for his leadership and his = kindness=20 for yielding me time.=20

Mr. Speaker, I have it right here in my hands, this = legislation that we intend to pass today criminalizes physicians, = hospitals,=20 innocent patients, sick people all over the world who are in need of the = relief=20 from the intellect and the ability that our scientists have to provide = hope over=20 death, life over death, better health over no health at all.=20

Mr. Speaker, I think it is extremely important as = we=20 confront the amazing opportunities of science and technology, as we look = to=20 secure the homeland with advances in science and technology that we call = today's=20 legislation what it is: a condemnation, an outrage on the outstanding = research=20 and abilities of our research scientists and medical professionals.=20

Mr. Speaker, if this was legislation to ban human = cloning,=20 you would have a unanimous green light from the Members of this = Congress. But=20 now what we are saying to those who are working in the venues of = research of=20 life and hope, we are suggesting to them that they must be condemned.=20

Mr. Speaker, I have heard of no such thing as women = selling=20 their eggs being intimidated to do so, but I do know those who have = Parkinson's=20 disease and other diseases who are suffering and who have spinal = injuries who=20 are suffering now who want us to be able to do the kind of research that = stem=20 cell research allows.=20

Mr. Speaker, H.R. 534 does nothing but criminalize = those=20 individuals who are now in research labs, innocent bright and brilliant=20 Americans who are trying to find hope for those who are ill. = Particularly the=20 stem cells that the President has allowed some 64 lines does not take = into=20 account the diversity and the different ethnic groups in this Nation, = the=20 diseases that afflict African Americans, Hispanic Americans, Jewish = Americans,=20 where research is needed on particular stem cell research.=20

The gentleman from New York (Mr. Nadler) = and=20 myself offered an amendment in the Committee on Rules, and I opposed = this rule=20 that would have provided specifically with the growing of those unique = stem=20 cells that would allow research on all Americans so that we could in = fact=20 provide the hope and life that is necessary. But yet the Committee on = Rules=20 decided in their wisdom to deny such an amendment, so we could not even = debate=20 it on the floor of the House.=20

It is very interesting to note that a recent = Institute of=20 Medicine study explains that, because the cells lines to researchers are = limited, they do not represent the genetic diversity of the general = population;=20 nor do they represent the diversity of our population. Diseases that = plague=20 minority populations are almost certainly not represented in the 64 = approved=20 stem cells. On the uses of stem cells, the National Institutes of Health = described the medical potential as enormous.=20

This legislation, Mr. Speaker, is to give a death = sentence=20 to millions and millions of Americans waiting by their bedsides hoping = beyond=20 hope. We realize that we have been able to give hope to the aging. We = have been=20 able to give hope to those who are suffering from diseases of which = heretofore=20 we could not even imagine a solution, that we could not have imagined = some 50,=20 70, or 100 years ago to cure.=20

[Time: 13:45]

We know in the early ages of this, of the history = of this=20 Nation, that individuals did not live to see 45 or 50 years old. Now we = are very=20 gratified to know that our population, our mothers and fathers, our = relatives,=20 are living to 75 and 80 and 85 and 90 years old. What a joy for families = across=20 this Nation and around the world.=20

Mr. Speaker, would we take this legislation that we = have=20 today and to be able to void all of the wonderful research that = generated an=20 extended life so that people might enjoy their families and enjoy the = wonderment=20 of the world, the outstanding new discoveries every day? Now we want to=20 criminalize our doctors, criminalize our hospitals, criminalize the = sick,=20 criminalize researchers with the passage of H.R. 534.=20

I oppose very much the legislation, the rule, and I = do=20 support the substitute.=20

The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Sweeney). The = Chair=20 would inform Members that the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr.=20 McGovern) has 8 minutes remaining, and the gentlewoman from = North=20 Carolina (Mrs. Myrick) has 18 1/2 minutes remaining.=20

The gentlewoman from North Carolina (Mrs. = Myrick)=20 is recognized.=20

Mrs. MYRICK. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the=20 gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Toomey).=20

Mr. TOOMEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support = for this=20 rule, and as a cosponsor and strong supporter of H.R. 534, and I urge my = colleagues to vote against the substitute amendment.=20

As the President stated just a few weeks ago, = ``Because no=20 human life should be started or ended as the object of an experiment, I = ask you=20 to set a high standard for humanity, and pass a law against all human = cloning.''=20

I am certainly very sympathetic to all those who = suffer=20 from incurable or chronic afflictions, and we are all committed to = helping find=20 cures. I understand the good intentions of those who advocate human = cloning in=20 the hope that research on these clones might yield cures for major = illnesses.=20 But for a variety of reasons, both technical and ethical, I believe it = is wrong=20 to pursue this approach.=20

On the technical level, the evidence suggests that = cloned=20 human embryos are not likely to yield cures for major illnesses. Hopes = to the=20 contrary are just not well founded and they provide false hopes for the=20 afflicted.=20

Supporters of human cloning for research purposes = have=20 proposed limitations which they claim will prevent a cloned baby from = being=20 born, but they=20

[Page: H1404]

would allow cloned embryos to = develop=20 indefinitely, as long as they are outside of a woman's womb. Where will = this=20 end?=20

The process of transferring a somatic cell nucleus = into an=20 enucleated egg produces a human embryo that has the potential to be = implanted in=20 utero and developed to term. In others words, the embryo produced for = the=20 purpose of therapeutic cloning, as some call it, is biologically=20 indistinguishable from an embryo intended for reproduction. It is a = human life,=20 at a very early stage of development, of course, but entirely human=20 nevertheless. Thus, creating cloned human embryos for research purposes = means=20 creating human life for the purpose of research and with the intent of=20 destroying it.=20

This commodification and exploitation strikes me as = a=20 profound undermining of our society's sense of human dignity, and in = doing so,=20 it undermines our very humanity.=20

Again, I urge a vote in favor of the rule, against = the=20 substitute amendment, and in favor of H.R. 534.=20

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire = from the=20 gentlewoman from North Carolina (Mrs. Myrick) how many more = speakers=20 she has.=20

Mrs. MYRICK. At this point, I only have two that = are here.=20 I have some others signed up, but they are not here yet. I only have two = more.=20

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 = minute to the=20 gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lofgren).=20

Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Speaker, I think it is important = to note=20 that much of what has been said today in support of this bill has = nothing to do=20 with protecting the country from the ills outlined.=20

What is somatic cell nuclear transfer? A woman = donates an=20 egg, a patient donates a skin cell. Perhaps the nucleus is removed from = the egg.=20 The DNA from the skin cell is inserted into the egg. The egg is = stimulated to=20 divide into eight cells, and those are the stem cells.=20

What has been talked about in terms of embryo=20 experimentation is certainly legal if this bill were to pass and instead = of a=20 skin cell there was a sperm that began that cell division, if we had in = vitro=20 fertilization, we could experiment all we wanted.=20

So I think where we are going with this proposal is = apparently a plan to outlaw in vitro fertilization in the United States. = I think=20 we ought to be clear about that.=20

Mrs. MYRICK. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the=20 gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Akin).=20

(Mr. AKIN asked and was given permission = to revise=20 and extend his remarks.)=20

Mr. AKIN. Mr. Speaker, I, in earlier days in my = life, used=20 to go out to junkyards sometimes to find parts for my sports car, go out = with=20 some wrenches, and we would take off a transmission or an alternator or=20 something like that. And of course, there is nothing wrong with finding = spare=20 parts in a junkyard.=20

But what we have before us in this debate is the = serious=20 possibility that if we do not direct science properly, that we could end = up in=20 some sort of a brave new world which none of us want to find ourselves = in, a=20 world in which parts of human beings are like parts in a junkyard. And = that may=20 sound a little bit like a science fiction novel or something like that, = but the=20 Human Cloning Prohibition Act of 2003 will ensure that human beings are = not=20 treated like old junk cars in some parking lot.=20

Therapeutic cloning pledges unique cures for = hundreds of=20 illnesses; yet, this is an empty promise. It has never produced a single = cure in=20 animal models nor has it produced any cures in human clinical trials. In = fact,=20 James Thompson, the scientist who discovered embryonic stem cells, said = in=20 reference to therapeutic cloning, ``The poor availability of human = oocytes, the=20 low efficiency of the nuclear transfer procedure and the long=20 population-doubling time of human embryonic stem cells make it difficult = to=20 envision this becoming a routine clinical procedure.''=20

Opening the door to therapeutic cloning will only = result in=20 a slippery slope of unscrupulous science and unenforceable law.=20

On the other hand, adult stem cells have produced = promising=20 medical results. These stem cells do not require the cloning or = destruction of=20 human embryos and have been successful in many human applications = without the=20 growth of tumors, which is a key defect in the use of cloned embryos.=20

Last year, in fact, researchers at the University = of=20 Minnesota announced that they had made a discovery involving an adult = human stem=20 cell that has the potential to develop into many different types of = cells in the=20 human body. What that means is it now seems entirely possible and = reasonable=20 that cells from one of our own, our own body, can then be coaxed into=20 replacement of organs or tissues that exactly match our own body that it = was=20 taken from.=20

Using adult stem cells, for example, a man named = Dean Grimm=20 of Charlotte, Iowa, regained his sight after having been blind due to a = chemical=20 accident in 1983. His physician implanted adult stem cells and also = three new=20 corneas. Now after being blind so many years he can see, and his sons = say that=20 since his dad has regained his sight, he and his siblings cannot get = away with a=20 lot of stuff.=20

A ban on therapeutic cloning will not restrict = science, but=20 it will deter the perversion of scientific research. I urge my = colleagues to=20 vote in favor of the rule for H.R. 534.=20

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 = minutes to=20 the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Maloney).=20

Mrs. MALONEY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman = for his=20 leadership, and I thank him for yielding me the time, and I rise in = opposition=20 to the rule and in opposition to the underlying bill, H.R. 534.=20

I am against human reproductive cloning, but I am = concerned=20 that the Weldon bill could exert a devastating impact on future = life-saving=20 research, and I fear that it will bring current research that offers = great=20 promise to cure a whole host of diseases to a grinding halt.=20

I represent a district that includes many premier = medical=20 research institutions. Top scientists have told me that therapeutic = cloning=20 could lead to cures and new treatments for cancer, heart disease, = diabetes,=20 Parkinson's, Alzheimer's, ALS, and other chronic or fatal illnesses, and = they=20 say that it could alleviate tremendous human suffering.=20

In a recent Newsweek article by Dr. Gerald = Fischbach, Dean=20 of the Faculty of Medicine at Columbia University Medical School and = former head=20 of NIH's National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Strokes, he = wrote the=20 following about this issue: ``A less obvious, but real, cost is the = damage to=20 the fabric of America's extraordinary culture of inquiry and technical=20 development in biomedical research. If revolutionary new therapies are = delayed=20 or outlawed, we could be set back for years, if not decades.''=20

It is appropriate that policymakers scrutinize = cutting-edge=20 science. We must ensure that research is conducted in a legal and = ethical=20 manner, but the underlying bill goes too far.=20

A more appropriate approach is the = Greenwood-Deutsch=20 substitute, and that bill will allow potentially life-saving research to = proceed=20 while banning human reproductive cloning.=20

I know something about the suffering of millions of = American families as their loved ones struggle against disease for which = research cloning may one day offer a treatment or cure. My own father = battled=20 against Parkinson's until he passed away this year, and I cannot in good = conscience tell those families that our society will benefit from an = outright=20 ban on this vital research.=20

I urge my colleagues to oppose H.R. 534 and to = support the=20 substitute.=20

Mrs. MYRICK. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the=20 gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Pence).=20

(Mr. PENCE asked and was given permission = to=20 revise and extend his remarks.)=20

Mr. PENCE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong and = grateful=20 support for the Human Cloning Prohibition Act and for the extraordinary = efforts=20 of my colleague, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Weldon), in = conceiving=20 of and promoting this bill over the last several years.=20

I also urge opposition to the substitute, despite = the fact=20 that I know it is well intended, and my colleagues on the Committee on = the=20 Judiciary, with whom I serve, I know bring great passion and compassion = to these=20 issues.=20

[Page: H1405]

I rise today, Mr. Speaker, not to demagogue an = issue and=20 not to vilify those who would differ with me but to offer a gentle but = firm=20 endorsement of a clean ban of human cloning in all of its permutations.=20

Like virtually everyone in this institution and = everyone,=20 as the previous speaker just said, opposed the idea of reproductive = human=20 cloning. We see it as deeply, morally offensive and objectionable, and = so it is.=20 But I would also offer, in a spirit of humility, Mr. Speaker, that even = that=20 which is called therapeutic cloning or the cloning only of nascent human = life=20 for the purpose of experimentation is also deeply, morally problematic = and that=20 we derive this from two basic principles from an understanding of the = history of=20 Western civilization.=20

That first principle is that which has = distinguished=20 Western civilization, with very few exceptions, has been our belief in = the=20 sanctity of human life, in the uniqueness and the preciousness of each = and every=20 individual human being. That has been something characteristic of = Western=20 civilization, and it has caused the laws of this Nation and the laws of = every=20 nation of Western civilization since its genesis 3,000 years ago to ever = back=20 slowly and respectfully away where human life is in question and where = the=20 depriving of human life is involved.=20

Against that backdrop, not only does history teach = us to=20 back away from the awesome power of human life, but it also teaches us = not to=20 trust government power; and, in fact, an undeniable truth of history has = been=20 that time and time again, each time government had the power to intrude = itself=20 on human life, that it abused that power and often trampled on human = beings and=20 classes of human beings and races of human beings.=20

It is against that spirit and against putting us on = that=20 slippery slope that I believe that the gentleman from Florida (Mr.=20 Weldon) has the right prescription here, Mr. Speaker, and we = should=20 draw a strong line in the sand, a moral line that says, as we look at = human life=20 or even nascent human life, wherever one determines that life begins, = that we=20 would back slowly and humbly away, ban human cloning for all of its = purposes,=20 ban all development of human life for experimentation and destruction.=20

[Time: 14:00]

As the Good Book says, ``I set before you today = life and=20 blessings, death and destruction. Now choose life.'' And it is my hope = and=20 confidence we will do so today.=20

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the = balance=20 of my time.=20

Mrs. MYRICK. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the=20 gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Souder).=20

(Mr. SOUDER asked and was given permission = to=20 revise and extend his remarks.)=20

Mr. SOUDER. Mr. Speaker, last May, the Subcommittee = on=20 Criminal Justice, Drug Policy and Human Resources held a hearing on = human=20 cloning. The subcommittee was informed that research cloning of humans = was=20 unnecessary due to the exciting medical breakthroughs utilizing adult = stem cells=20 and other ethical avenues of research. We were told that scientists = agree that=20 cloning is dangerous and clones suffer from countless severe genetic = disorders.=20

The Department of Justice informed us that it would = be=20 impossible to enforce a bill that allowed human cloning for the purpose = of=20 research and not reproduction. And we were warned by Dr. Zavos of = Kentucky that=20 unless a ban on human cloning was enacted, he and other rogue scientists = would=20 soon successfully clone humans.=20

Despite these warnings, researchers seeking to = clone humans=20 for research make hollow promises and offer false hope that such = research will=20 result in cures for numerous human ailments. The fact is human cloning = is never=20 necessary regardless of its intent, and better ethical research = alternatives do=20 exist.=20

Nearly every week, for example, new scientific=20 breakthroughs utilizing adult stem cells are announced. Researchers = report that=20 they have grown an entire organ from adult stem cells. And just this = week,=20 scientists have announced that a type of cell found in blood can be = turned into=20 nearly any cell in the body.=20

These findings and others like them suggest that = every one=20 of us may carry our own ``repair kit'' that can be used to treat = countless=20 medical disorders and genetic diseases by allowing doctors to regrow = organs and=20 tissues from our own cells. And unlike destructive human cloning = research that=20 remains entirely speculative, adult stem cell therapies are already = currently=20 being used to treat a host of medical conditions.=20

There are no guarantees that allowing human cloning = for=20 research will produce cures or that cloned embryos will not be misused = for other=20 purposes. If we now permit the manufacturing of human embryos for human=20 research, where do we draw the line? Do we only allow cloned embryos to = grow for=20 5 days before they are destroyed in the process of extracting their stem = cells?=20 What about removing tissue from 5-week-old embryos? Should we consider=20 harvesting the organs from 5-month-old fetuses? What will those who = support=20 destructive research claim is necessary next to advance science?=20

We must finally draw the line and stop the = exploitation of=20 all forms of human life. The science is clear. So is the moral issue. In = my=20 favorite movie, ``Rudy,'' a great scene has the priest telling Rudy = there are=20 two things in life he knows for sure, one is that there is a God, and, = secondly,=20 that he is not God.=20

Mr. Speaker, I would urge my colleagues to vote for = the=20 Weldon-Stupak bill.=20

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the = balance=20 of my time.=20

Mrs. MYRICK. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 5 = minutes=20 to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Weldon), the author of this=20 legislation.=20

Mr. WELDON of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I thank the = gentlewoman=20 for yielding me this time.=20

Mr. Speaker, I think this is a good, fair rule. It = allows=20 an honest debate of the issues. As many of my colleagues know, I am a = physician.=20 I still see patients once a month at the veterans clinic in my = congressional=20 district, and I practiced medicine for 15 years before I was elected to = the=20 House of Representatives. I took care of a lot of patients with = paralysis,=20 Parkinson's disease, diabetes, and Alzheimer's disease. I saw firsthand = on a=20 daily basis the hardship those people and their families went through.=20

Indeed, I wanted to share with all my colleagues = that my=20 father died of complications of diabetes disease. I had six uncles. When = I was=20 growing up as a kid, one of my favorite uncles was my Uncle John. He = died of=20 complications of Parkinson's disease. So if there were evidence to = support the=20 position being held by some people in this body and some people in the=20 scientific community that there was great potential from therapeutic = cloning, I=20 would be the first to admit it. I would be the first person to = acknowledge it. I=20 could not deny it because it would be evident in the medical literature. = But the=20 fact of the matter is, the evidence is not there.=20

What we are debating today is the ethical = parameters on the=20 whole issue of regenerative medicine. For decades, doctors have had at = their=20 disposal surgical techniques to help people and make them well. They = have had=20 medications, drugs that they could use to make people well. And in the = past 20=20 years, they have been making use of something called regenerative = medicine using=20 what is called stem cells. This bill, contrary to what some people say, = does not=20 ban stem cell research. It does not ban embryo stem cell research. It=20 specifically bans the creation of cloned human embryos.=20

We voted on this very issue. We debated this issue = on the=20 floor of this House a year and a half ago. It was July of 2001. The = progression=20 of science is something that we need to include in this debate. I went = through=20 the medical literature just about the last 12 months; and I have about = 88=20 studies showing adult stem cells in humans and that they have tremendous = potential, that they are actually finding application in the treatment = of 45=20 different diseases.=20

Mr. Speaker, I wish I could produce a study that = shows that=20 therapeutic cloning in humans has potential, but there is not even one = study.=20 Indeed, I wish I could introduce a study that shows that therapeutic = cloning in=20 animals has potential; but, likewise, there is not a single study even = in=20 animals. It has been tried in mice, and it has not worked. Therapeutic = cloning=20 has never been done.=20

[Page: H1406]

We are debating here on the floor of the House = therapeutic=20 cloning as though therapeutic cloning exists, as though it is around the = corner.=20 Let us get realistic here. People are going to come to the floor, and = they are=20 going to suggest that we have to hold out therapeutic cloning because it = is the=20 only hope for these people. We are funding NIH $27 billion a year. We = have=20 thousands of researchers all over the Nation doing all kinds of research = using=20 all kinds of modalities, surgeries, therapies, medications; and this=20 regenerative medicine issue is one little slice of what researchers are=20 exploring to help these people with these conditions. We are essentially = debating a subsegment of that. And some people will come down here and = hold that=20 up as though it is the only thing out there.=20

Let us get realistic. It has never been done. They = tried it=20 in mice, and it was published in ``Cell.'' For those who do not read the = scientific literature, this is one of the most prestigious journals that = cell=20 biologists read. I will quote from the study. It says: ``Our results = raise the=20 provocative possibility that even genetically matched cells derived by=20 therapeutic cloning may still face barriers to effective transplantation = for=20 some disorders.'' They tried therapeutic cloning in a mouse model of = disease and=20 it failed dismally. So not only can we not produce a study that shows = that it=20 works, we can produce studies that show that it does not work.=20

I think the time has arrived for us to do the right = thing.=20 This is a moral and ethical decision. We are talking about scientists = creating=20 human embryos for the purpose of exploiting them and destroying them, = and there=20 is no scientific evidence today that this is justifiable.=20

Mr. Speaker, I will include for the RECORD = the=20 studies I referred to above.=20

PARLIAMENTARY INQUIRY=20

Mr. McGOVERN. Parliamentary inquiry, Mr. = Speaker.=20

The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Sweeney). The = gentleman will state his parliamentary inquiry.=20

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I wonder if the = Chair=20 can inform me how much it will cost the American taxpayer to reprint the = several=20 months of studies that have just been submitted for the RECORD?=20

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair would inform the = gentleman that that is not a parliamentary inquiry.=20

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 = minutes to=20 the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Slaughter).=20

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman = from=20 Massachusetts for yielding me this time. I very much want to rise and = join my=20 colleagues in opposition to this rule and to the underlying bill.=20

Mr. Speaker, why would Members of Congress want to = turn=20 doctors into criminals and treat medical researchers like outlaws? With = all the=20 grave issues facing America that continue to go unaddressed by this = body, our=20 broken health care system, a lack of education funding, fears of Social = Security=20 insolvency and a soaring economy, why are we spending time criminalizing = promising medical research and threatening to send doctors to jail for = 10 years?=20

This bill does not regulate the way that Federal = funds are=20 spent on medical research. It makes medical research or treatments using = therapeutic cloning a Federal crime. The role of our government is to = provide=20 research achievements and to provide incubators for medical and = scientific=20 breakthroughs. It is not our job to criminalize good doctors or to force = leaders=20 in medical research to abandon promising techniques.=20

According to the National Institutes of Health, = which=20 advises us on a daily basis, therapeutic cloning could provide = treatments for=20 Parkinson's disease, chronic heart failure, in-stage kidney disease, = liver=20 failure, rheumatoid arthritis, osteoporosis, severe burns, spinal cord = injuries,=20 multiple sclerosis, Alzheimer's disease, diabetes, lupus, heart damage, = cancer,=20 paralyzed limbs, and Lou Gehrig's disease. There is even the hope this = research=20 could lead to entire transplantable organs.=20

Forty Nobel laureates, millions of patients, former = First=20 Lady Nancy Reagan, and former President Gerald Ford advocate human = cloning. In=20 fact, just last month, Mrs. Reagan wrote to Senator Hatch, the = Chair of=20 the Senate Committee on the Judiciary, supporting therapeutic cloning.=20

Despite the arrogant amendment that only this = Committee on=20 Rules would ever give to anyone, because it is the height of arrogance, = this=20 bill tells us that they want to ban cloning, therapeutic cloning, not = just here=20 but all over the world. My, what a reach we do have.=20

The promising research that we are trying to stop = today=20 will be driven overseas where therapeutic cloning is not only legal but = is=20 government funded. Other countries will become the world leaders in = these=20 treatments.=20

As a scientist, and I am, I am profoundly concerned = about=20 what I hear as very bad science on this floor. Sick Americans would not = benefit=20 from the American miracles if they occurred in another country because = the=20 legislation prohibits improving lifesaving medical technology if the = treatment=20 is developed by therapeutic cloning. If scientists overseas develop a = cure for=20 Parkinson's disease using stem cells from therapeutic cloning, suffering = Americans would be banned by their government from taking advantage of = that cure=20 here in the United States. Imagine that. We want to criminalize almost=20 everybody.=20

Once again, Mr. Speaker, the majority weakens this = noble=20 institution and the deliberative process. It is a shame and a blight on = Congress=20 that we would even bring a bill of this magnitude, affecting the life = and health=20 of millions of Americans, without this bill even going through the = committee=20 procedure.=20

Mrs. MYRICK. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the=20 gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Gingrey).=20

Mr. GINGREY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman = for=20 yielding me this time, and I rise today in support of this rule and I = urge its=20 passage.=20

Mr. Speaker, we are doing the right thing here = today. It is=20 my belief, as an OB-GYN physician for over 28 years, with over 5,000 = deliveries,=20 that human cloning is not only morally wrong but it is also a very = dangerous=20 practice.=20

Human cloning for reproduction poses serious risks = of=20 producing children who are stillborn, severely malformed, or disabled. = We can=20 make this assertion because most cloned animals have demonstrated = serious=20 genetic defects. The most high-profile example, of course, is Dolly the = sheep,=20 with the premature aging situation.=20

[Time: 14:15]

With this knowledge, would we wish to create these=20 hardships for even one child?=20

I also oppose cloning embryos for research because = it is a=20 very short bridge to implantation and, thus, reproductive cloning. If we = allow=20 human embryo farms for research, it will become impossible to enforce a = ban on=20 reproductive cloning.=20

Although I fully support this rule and H.R. 534, I = do have=20 concerns about the bill. The creation and destruction of human life is = the most=20 serious issue that we can face. Therefore, if it is unacceptable to = participate=20 in human cloning within the United States, then we should extend this = ban and=20 prohibit United States researchers from participating in human cloning = outside=20 of the United States as well. U.S. law when enacted is assumed not to = apply to=20 citizens when they are outside of the United States borders. In other = words,=20 there is an ``assumptive nonapplication.'' However, the courts have held = when=20 Congress acts to explicitly apply United States law to citizens acting = outside=20 of our borders, the justice system can prosecute these actions.=20

H.R. 534 is a good bill, but in the future we = should seek=20 to extend the ban to prohibit United States citizens from performing = human=20 cloning outside of our borders.=20

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself = the=20 balance of my time.=20

Mr. Speaker, the cloning of a human being is wrong, = and=20 this body and the American public should not stand for it. But that is = not what=20 this debate is about. The Weldon bill is misguided, it is unnecessary, = and it is=20 just plain bad policy and it should be defeated. It is misguided because = it will=20 stifle and end research that will undoubtedly improve and save human = lives.=20 Should scientists have given up on finding a cure for polio merely = because they=20 had already developed the iron lung? Of course not. With all due respect = to the=20

[Page: H1407]

author of this legislation, = there are other=20 physicians, many, and there are scientists, many, who believe in the = promise of=20 therapeutic cloning. The National Academy of Sciences sees the value in=20 therapeutic cloning. Forty Nobel laureates all support going forward = with=20 therapeutic cloning.=20

The Weldon bill is unnecessary because the Food and = Drug=20 Administration has already declared reproductive cloning illegal and = subject to=20 prosecution under current law. Dr. Kathryn Zoon, the director of the = Center for=20 Biologics Evaluation and Research at the FDA, wrote in a March 28, 2001, = letter=20 that, quote, clinical research using cloning technology to clone a human = being=20 may not proceed without an investigational new drug application and = that, given=20 unresolved safety questions, the FDA would not permit any such = investigation to=20 proceed.=20

The letter works. No individual and no group has = tried to=20 clone a human being in the United States for fear of prosecution by the = FDA.=20

But having said that, if this bill were only about = banning=20 human cloning, I would be for it. I think it would pass almost = unanimously, if=20 not unanimously, in this House. But this bill goes much farther than = that. The=20 Weldon bill is bad policy because in my opinion it is cruel. Remember = the words=20 of Nancy Reagan. She wrote, there are so many diseases that can be cured = or at=20 least helped that we can't turn our back on this. We have lost so much = time=20 already. I can't bear to lose any more.=20

It is cruel to deny potential cures to people who = suffer=20 from Alzheimer's or Parkinson's disease. It is cruel to legislate that a = cure=20 for diabetes developed in Great Britain may not be used to cure diabetes = in this=20 country if therapeutic cloning were used to find a cure to that problem. = But=20 that is just what the Weldon bill does.=20

I would urge my colleagues to support the = Greenwood-Deutsch=20 substitute. If that fails, please defeat the Weldon bill.=20

Mr. Speaker, I include Dr. Zoon's letter for the=20 RECORD.=20

The text of the letter is as follows:=20

Department of Health and Human Services, Public = Health=20 Service, Food and Drug Administration,

Rockville, MD, March 28, 2001.=20

DEAR: The purpose of this letter is to = remind your=20 organization and its members that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) = has=20 jurisdiction over clinical research using cloning technology to clone a = human=20 being, and to inform you of the FDA regulatory process that is required. = You are=20 receiving this letter because of a number of recent reports in the media = describing the use of cloning technology to clone human beings. As = described=20 more fully below, the appropriate mechanism to pursue such clinical=20 investigation using cloning technology is the submission of an = investigational=20 new drug application (IND) to FDA's Center for Biologics Evaluation and = Research=20 (CBER). Please inform the members of your organization of the = information=20 provided below.=20

Clinical research using cloning technology to clone = a human=20 being is subject to FDA regulation under the Public Health Service Act = and the=20 Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. Under these statutes and FDA's=20 implementing regulations, before such research may begin, the sponsor of = the=20 research is required to: submit to FDA an IND describing the proposed = research=20 plan; obtain authorization from a properly constituted institutional = review=20 board (IRB); and obtain a commitment from the investigators to obtain = informed=20 consent from all human subjects of the research. Such research may = proceed only=20 when an IND is in effect. Since the FDA believes that there are major = unresolved=20 safety questions pertaining to the use of cloning technology to clone a = human=20 being, until those questions are appropriately addressed in an IND, FDA = would=20 not permit any such investigation to proceed.=20

FDA may prohibit a sponsor from conducting a study = proposed=20 in an IND application (often referred to as placing the study on = ``clinical=20 hold'') for a variety of reasons. If the Agency finds that ``human = subjects are=20 or would be exposed to an unreasonable and significant risk of illness = or=20 injury,'' that would be sufficient reason to put a study on clinical = hold. Other=20 reasons listed in the regulations include ``the IND does not contain = sufficient=20 information required to assess the risks to subjects of the proposed = studies,''=20 or ``the clinical investigators are not qualified by reason of their = scientific=20 training and experience to conduct the investigation.''=20

The procedures and requirements governing the use = of=20 investigational new drugs, including those for the submission and review = of=20 INDs, are set forth in Title 21 of the Code of Federal Regulations = (CFR), Part=20 312. Additional responsibilities of the sponsor of an IND include: = selecting=20 qualified investigators and overseeing the conduct of the investigators; = ensuring that the investigations are performed in accordance with the = protocols=20 of the IND; submitting adverse experience reports and annual reports; = and other=20 duties as outlined in the regulations. The responsibilities of an = investigator=20 include: ensuring that the study is conducted in accordance with the = protocols;=20 obtaining informed consent from study participants; and ensuring that an = IRB=20 that complies with the requirements of 21 CFR Part 56 reviews and = approves the=20 proposed clinical study and the informed consent form and procedures for = obtaining informed consent, among other requirements specified in the=20 regulations.=20

Clinical investigators are encouraged to obtain a = copy of=20 the current ``Information Sheets for IRBs and Clinical Investigators'' = (which=20 contains useful information regarding clinical investigations) from = CBER's=20 Manufacturers Assistance and Technical Training Branch at = 1-800-835-4709. This=20 document is also available at http://www.fda.gov/oc/oha/irb/toc.html.=20

Additional information on how to submit an IND can = be found=20 on CBER's website at: http://www.fda/gov/cber/ind/ind.htm. Copies of the = relevant sections of 21 CFR, including Parts 50 (Protection of Human = Subjects),=20 56 (Institutional Review Boards), and 312 (Investigational New Drug = Application)=20 can be found at: http://www.gpo.gov/nara/cfr. Information on ways to = communicate=20 with CBER is available for you or members of the association at:=20 http://www.fda.gov/cber/pubinquire.htm.=20

We encourage your members to meet with the Agency = prior to=20 submitting any IND application. Such a meeting would be arranged through = the=20 Office of Therapeutics Research and Review of FDA's Center for Biologics = Evaluation and Research.=20

Sincerely yours,
KATHRYN C. ZOON,=20

Director,
Center for Biologics = Evaluation=20 and Research.=20

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.=20

Mrs. MYRICK. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance = of my=20 time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.=20

The previous question was ordered.=20

The resolution was agreed to.=20

A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.=20

The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mrs. Myrick). = Pursuant to=20 House Resolution 105 and rule XVIII, the Chair declares the House in the = Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union for the = consideration of=20 the bill, H.R. 534.=20

[Time: 14:20]

IN THE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE=20

Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the = Committee=20 of the Whole House on the State of the Union for the consideration of = the bill=20 (H.R. 534) to amend title 18, United States Code, to prohibit human = cloning,=20 with Mr. Sweeney in the chair.=20

The Clerk read the title of the bill.=20

The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the rule, the bill is = considered=20 as having been read the first time.=20

Under the rule, the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr.=20 Sensenbrenner) and the gentlewoman from California (Ms.=20 Lofgren) each will control 30 minutes.=20

The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Wisconsin = (Mr.=20 Sensenbrenner).=20

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself = such time=20 as I may consume.=20

Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of H.R. 534, the = Human=20 Cloning Prohibition Act of 2003. This bill criminalizes the act of = cloning=20 humans, importing cloned humans and importing products derived from = cloned=20 humans. It is what is needed, and it is what President Bush has asked = for, a=20 comprehensive ban against cloning people. It has bipartisan = cosponsorship and=20 was reported favorably by the Committee on the Judiciary on February 12. =

Today we are considering more than the moral and = ethical=20 issues raised by human cloning. This vote is about providing moral = leadership=20 for a watching world. We have the largest and most powerful research = community=20 on the face of the earth and we devote more money to research and = development=20 than any other nation in the world. Although many other nations have = already=20 taken steps to ban human cloning, the world is waiting for the United = States to=20 set the moral tone against this experimentation.=20

Currently in the United States there are no clear = rules or=20 regulations over privately funded human cloning. Although the FDA has = announced=20 it has the authority to regulate human cloning through the Public Health = Service=20 Act and the Food, Drug and=20

[Page: H1408]

Cosmetic Act, this authority is = unclear and has=20 not been tested. The fact of the matter is that the FDA cannot stop = human=20 cloning, it can only begin to regulate it. This will be a day late and a = dollar=20 short for a clone that is used for research, harvesting organs, or born=20 grotesquely deformed.=20

In November 2001, researchers at Advanced Cell = Technology=20 in Worcester, Massachusetts announced that they had cloned the first = human=20 embryo. Others have indicated that they are prepared to utilize existing = technology to clone a human baby. On December 26, 2002, Clonaid = announced the=20 birth of the first cloned human baby. Although the Clonaid announcement = appears=20 to have been a hoax, there are a growing number of individuals who claim = that=20 they can and will clone a human being. In light of these announcements, = it has=20 become imperative that the Congress act immediately to prevent the = cloning of=20 human embryos from continuing.=20

Others argue that cloned humans are the key that = will=20 unlock the door to medical achievements in the 21st century. Nothing = could be=20 further from the truth. These miraculous achievements may be found = through stem=20 cell research but not from cloning. Let me be perfectly clear. H.R. 534 = does not=20 in any way impede or prohibit stem cell research that does not require = cloned=20 human embryos. This debate is whether or not it should be legal in the = United=20 States to clone human beings. Nothing more and nothing less.=20

While H.R. 534 does not prohibit the use of cloning = techniques to produce molecules, tissues, organs, plants, DNA cells = other than=20 human embryos, and animals other than humans, it does prohibit the = creation of=20 cloned embryos. This is absolutely necessary to prevent human cloning = because,=20 as we all know, embryos become people. If scientists were permitted to = clone=20 embryos, they would eventually be stockpiled and mass marketed. In = addition, it=20 would be impossible to enforce a ban on human reproductive cloning. Let = me=20 repeat that. It would be impossible to enforce a ban on human = reproductive=20 cloning because once a cloned human embryo is implanted into a woman's = uterus,=20 it can grow and become a baby. Therefore, any legislative attempt to ban = human=20 cloning must include embryos.=20

Should human cloning ever prove successful, its = potential=20 applications and expected demands would undoubtedly and ultimately lead = to a=20 worldwide mass market for human clones. Human clones would be used for = medical=20 experimentation, leading to human exploitation under the good name of = medicine.=20 Parents would want the best genes for their children, creating a market = for=20 human designer genes. Again, governments would have to weigh in and = decide=20 questions such as what rights do human clones hold, who is responsible = for them,=20 who will ensure their health, and what interaction will clones have with = their=20 genealogical parent.=20

As most people know, Dolly the sheep was cloned in = 1996.=20 Since that time, scientists from around the globe have experimentally = cloned a=20 number of monkeys, mice, cows, goats, lambs, bulls and pigs. It took 277 = attempts to clone Dolly; 276 failures before success. These later = experiments=20 also produced a very low rate of success, a dismal 3 percent. Now some = of the=20 same scientists would like to add people, human beings, to this = experimental=20 list. As it turns out, Dolly the sheep was also a failure. It just took = 6 years=20 to realize it. On February 14, Dolly the sheep was euthanized as a = result of=20 complications linked to what some geneticists are speculating were signs = of=20 premature aging.=20

Human cloning is both ethically and morally = offensive. It=20 diminishes the careful balance of humanity that nature has installed in = each of=20 us. I believe we need to send a clear and distinct message to the = watching world=20 that America will not permit human cloning and that it does not support=20 scientific research into cloning human embryos. This bill sends this = message, by=20 permitting cloning research on human DNA molecules, cells, tissues, = organs, or=20 animals but preventing the creation of cloned human embryos.=20

Mr. Chairman, I urge all Members to unequivocally = say no to=20 human cloning by supporting H.R. 534. Stop human cloning and preserve = the=20 integrity of mankind and allow legitimate scientific research to = continue.=20

Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.=20

Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time = as I=20 may consume.=20

Mr. Chairman, I, like the authors of H.R. 534, = believe that=20 we should outlaw human cloning. If we wanted to pass a bill that only = prohibits=20 human cloning, it would sail through Congress on a voice vote. But this = bill=20 goes too far. It halts the progress of medical research by banning = somatic cell=20 nuclear transfer for research and medical treatments. This research has = promise=20 for diseases like Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, diabetes and others. This = bill=20 criminalizes a scientific research process that takes place in a petri = dish,=20 regardless of the intent of the researcher or the inability of this = process to=20 result in the birth of a cloned child. The penalty for violating these=20 provisions includes sanctions of a criminal fine and/or imprisonment for = up to=20 10 years and a civil penalty of at least $1 million. This would = represent an=20 unprecedented intrusion of the criminal law into the scientific process. =

I think the science teachers of America may be = pretty=20 appalled at what they hear and see on this floor today. I think much = that has=20 been said and will be said reflects a profound ignorance about the = science,=20 about the current role of the FDA in their regulatory practices, but = also=20 Americans need to ask themselves why the proponents of this bill want to = ban=20 this research, and I think the answer is simple: They want to impose = their=20 religious beliefs on the entire country.=20

[Time: 14:30]

This country reflects the diverse religious beliefs = found=20 all over the world. Some, like the authors of this bill, believe that = all=20 cloning is wrong. Others believe that research cloning should be = allowed. These=20 are all legitimate views, but I think it is wrong to use the political = power of=20 one group to criminalize the beliefs of another.=20

To better understand the real issue involved in = this=20 debate, it is important to understand what research cloning is. Somatic = cell=20 nuclear transfer has six steps: a woman donates an egg; a patient = donates a=20 somatic cell, like a skin cell; the nucleus is removed from the egg; the = nucleus=20 from the patient's skin cell is inserted into the egg; the egg is then=20 stimulated to induce it to divide; the egg begins to divide, creating = stem cells=20 that are identical to the patient's own cells.=20

So we are talking about the creation of cells in a = petri=20 dish, not bringing a child into this world. That is why research cloning = is=20 supported by some of the most ardent pro-life conservatives like Senator = ORRIN HATCH and former Senator Connie Mack, who said, ``Anyone = who would=20 ban research on embryonic stem cells will be responsible for harm done = to real=20 live postnatal sentient beings who might be helped by this research.''=20

Why is this process important? Scientists believe = that=20 these stem cells are less likely to be rejected after transplant since = they have=20 the same genetic properties as the recipient. They could also help = scientists=20 learn why diseases occur. They also have important advantages over adult = stem=20 cells which cannot develop into as many cell types and which cannot be = generated=20 in the same quantities in the lab. That is why this bill is opposed by = almost=20 every organization representing patients and researchers, including = Juvenile=20 Diabetes Research Foundation, the Cancer Research and Prevention = Foundation, the=20 Biotechnology Industry Association, the Society for Women's Health = Research, the=20 Coalition for the Advancement of Medical Research, and the Alliance for = Aging=20 Research.=20

I have heard the words that we are going down a = ``slippery=20 slope'' used by the proponents of this bill, but in fact the slippery = slope is=20 that being suggested by those who call six cells in a petri dish the = equivalent=20 of me or my mother. If it is murder to use somatic cell transfer and to = create=20 six cells for research purposes, then it must also be mass murder to = have in=20 vitro fertilization and discard the cells that are not later utilized by = the=20 couple using IVF. So the slippery slope is to eliminate in vitro = fertilization=20 in this country.=20

This debate really boils down to one question: = Should an=20 embryonic stem cell with no central nervous system, no chance of = developing into=20 a fetus have the same rights as a child suffering=20

[Page: H1409]

from juvenile diabetes? I do = not think so. I=20 urge you not to rob sick Americans of their hope for a cure.=20

Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.=20

ANNOUNCEMENT BY THE CHAIRMAN

The CHAIRMAN. The Chair reminds the Members that it = is not=20 in order to cite the views of sitting Senators.=20

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes = to the=20 gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Coble).=20

Mr. COBLE. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from = Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner), our chairman, for yielding me = this time.=20

Mr. Chairman, the manufacture of cloned human = beings alarms=20 an overwhelming majority of Americans. The theoretical discussion = surrounding=20 the cloning of humans has raised profound ethical and legal issues. = Currently,=20 no clear regulations exist in the United States that would prevent a = private=20 group from attempting to create a human clone. H.R. 534 would prevent=20 experimental procedures that the National Bioethics Advisory Commission, = the=20 NBAC, called scientifically and ethically objectionable. The NBAC = unanimously=20 concluded that given the state of science, ``any attempt to create a = child using=20 somatic cell nuclear transfer, whether in the public or private sector, = is=20 uncertain in its outcome, is unacceptably dangerous to the fetus and, = therefore,=20 morally unacceptable.'' In fact, virtually every widely known and = respected=20 organization that has taken a position on reproductive human cloning = flatly=20 opposes the notion because of the extreme ethical and moral concerns.=20

Cloning of human beings carries massive risks of = producing=20 unhealthy, abnormal, malformed children. The only way to prevent this = from=20 happening is to adopt the restrictions on human cloning set forth in = H.R. 534.=20 As Professor Bradley of the Notre Dame School of Law testified last = Congress,=20 ``The only effective way to prohibit human reproductive cloning is to = prohibit=20 all human cloning.'' Any other approach would allow for stockpiles of = cloned=20 human embryos to be produced, bought, and sold without restrictions.=20 Implantation of cloned embryos, a relatively simple procedure, would = inevitably=20 occur. Attempts to enforce a cloning ban would prove virtually = impossible to=20 monitor. The last time Congress dealt with the issue of human cloning, = an=20 editorial in the Washington Post stated: ``It is unnecessary to be = against=20 abortion rights or to believe human life literally begins at conception = to be=20 deeply alarmed by the notion of scientists purposely causing conceptions = in a=20 context entirely divorced from even the potential of reproduction.'' The = editorial went on to characterize the creation of embryos solely for = research as=20 unconscionable.=20

It is important to note that research currently = being done=20 using adult stem cells, which I support, is showing great progress. I = believe=20 this relatively new area of research, Mr. Chairman, deserves appropriate = funding=20 and necessary scientific resources to discover its complete potential. = To divert=20 resources from this promising research to controversial procedures, such = as=20 therapeutic cloning, may inadvertently push an effective cure farther = out of=20 reach.=20

I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 534, Mr. = Chairman.=20

Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to the = gentleman from New York (Mr. Nadler), my colleague on the = Committee on=20 the Judiciary.=20

Mr. NADLER. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to = this=20 dangerous and ill considered legislation. Rather than protecting the = sanctity of=20 human life, this legislation will needlessly sentence untold generations = of=20 innocent human beings to premature death and lifetimes of suffering. = There is no=20 disagreement that it is immoral to use cloning to create human beings = and that=20 that ought to be prohibited. The evidence from research involving cloned = animals=20 is that such efforts can result in severe deformities, premature aging = and=20 death. It is wrong to willfully inflict this kind of suffering on people = and it=20 should not be permitted. If this bill prohibited only that kind of = activity, we=20 would have no disagreement and no debate.=20

It is precisely because we abhor the suffering that = would=20 result from using cloning techniques for human reproduction that it is = also=20 clearly immoral to criminalize using so-called therapeutic cloning, = which=20 scientists call somatic cell nuclear transfer, for medical research and = medical=20 treatment. The fruits of this research promise cures for Parkinson's = disease,=20 chronic heart disease, rheumatoid arthritis, spinal cord injuries, = Alzheimer's=20 disease, Huntington's disease, brain damage, lupus, combined = immunodeficiency,=20 Tay-Sachs, and sickle cell disease, to name just a few.=20

We will hear that we must make criminal the = creation of=20 human life in order to destroy that human life to produce stem cells. = But that=20 assumes that a one-celled organism or a several-celled embryo is a human = being.=20 If it is, then therapeutic cloning is immoral. If a several-celled = embryo is not=20 a human being, then therapeutic cloning is not only not immoral but is=20 profoundly moral, as it will be used to save and prolong human lives.=20

So what is this bill really about? It would write = into our=20 criminal law a particular religious view that holds that a few cells in = a petri=20 dish are moral equivalents to a fully developed human being or in fact a = human=20 being, and that no benefit to those suffering and dying from terrible = diseases=20 would justify such research, would justify the destruction of a = several-celled=20 embryo.=20

People are certainly entitled to their religious = beliefs,=20 but they are not entitled to inflict suffering on the sick and death on = the ill=20 and enforce the imposition of their religious beliefs on others using $1 = million=20 fines and 10-year prison sentences. In fact, there are many other = religious=20 perspectives that disagree with the religious perspective that is the = only=20 justification for this bill.=20

As the Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations and = the=20 Rabbinical Council of America put it in a letter to President Bush: = ``The=20 potential to save and heal human lives is an integral part of valuing = human life=20 from the traditional Jewish perspective. Moreover, our rabbinic = authorities=20 inform us that an isolated fertilized egg does not enjoy the full status = of=20 personhood and its attendant protections. Thus, if embryonic stem cell = research=20 can help us preserve and heal humans with greater success and does not = require=20 or encourage the destruction of life in the process, it ought to be = pursued.''=20 This opinion comes from a religious community that does not favor = legalized=20 abortion, which should put to rest the view that this is a debate about=20 abortion. It is not. It is rather a debate about whether anyone should = be=20 allowed to use our criminal laws to impose their particular religious = view on=20 the vast majority of Americans who may not share that moral or religious = outlook.=20

Muslim groups, Mormons, some mainline Protestant=20 denominations including the United Church of Christ and the Presbyterian = Church=20 (USA) support stem cell research. It is wrong to cause so much suffering = in the=20 name of protecting the sanctity of human life. It is especially wrong to = use the=20 criminal code to impose that narrowly held view on the innocent and the=20 vulnerable. It is said that therapeutic cloning has nothing to do with = the=20 therapeutic use of stem cells, but it may very well be that only = embryonic stem=20 cells produced by therapeutic cloning can overcome the body's immune = defenses in=20 order to be able to cure a disease; and the same people who oppose = therapeutic=20 cloning oppose the use of embryonic stem cells for the same reason: = their=20 religious view that the several-celled embryo from which the embryonic = stem=20 cells are derived is a human being. They are entitled to their belief. = They are=20 not entitled to impose that religious belief on the entire country at = the cost=20 of who-knows-how-many lives.=20

It is said that allowing therapeutic cloning will=20 inevitably lead to reproductive cloning, but research and medical = practice can=20 be regulated and can be policed. We have heard today that this is a = moral=20 question. Yes, in part. It is immoral to prohibit medical research and = treatment=20 that can save lives. It is immoral to make it criminal, as this bill = would do,=20 to import a cancer vaccine from a foreign country if that vaccine was = produced=20 through therapeutic cloning in a foreign country. And it is immorally = arrogant,=20 immorally arrogant to think that only one religious view is valid or = moral and=20 that one has the right to use political=20

[Page: H1410]

power to impose that religious = view on the rest=20 of the American people who may hold different religious views. That is = what this=20 bill would do. That is why this is an immoral bill unless amended to = apply only=20 to reproductive cloning.=20

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 30 = seconds.=20 As I recall, when Moses came down from the mountain, he had 10 = commandments with=20 him. One of them said thou shalt not murder and the other said thou = shalt not=20 steal, and I do not think anybody in their right mind would say that = criminal=20 laws saying that murder and theft are criminal in nature is imposing = religious=20 views on anybody. They are both wrong; they are both criminal.=20

Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman = from Ohio=20 (Mr. Chabot).=20

(Mr. CHABOT asked and was given permission = to=20 revise and extend his remarks.)=20

Mr. CHABOT. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support = of the=20 Human Cloning Prohibition Act. This legislation would ban any use of = cloning to=20 create human embryos. In contrast, agreeing with the Greenwood = substitute would=20 permit, indeed would encourage the creation of any number of human = embryos by=20 cloning for the purpose of harvesting their parts. The substitute even = leaves=20 open the door, as artificial womb technology advances, to growing cloned = humans=20 to later stages of fetal development for the harvesting of their tissues = and=20 organs as has already been done with cloned cows and mice.=20

As we seek to improve human life, we must always = preserve=20 human dignity, and therefore we must preclude human cloning by stopping = it=20 before it starts. Creating, killing, and harvesting one human being in = the=20 service of others raises significant ethical and moral concerns. As a = society,=20 are we willing to endorse a policy that allows the creation of human = life so=20 that it can then be destroyed? Cloning is a dangerous assault on human = life. It=20 is an affront to human dignity. It is not a policy that should be = supported by=20 the United States Congress.=20

I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 534 and oppose = the=20 Greenwood amendment.=20

I include for the RECORD this letter from = the=20 National Right to Life group.=20

NATIONAL RIGHT TO LIFE LETTER,=20

February 21, 2003.
Re Greenwood = embryo-farms=20 substitute amendment vs. Weldon-Stupak Human Cloning Prohibition Act. =

DEAR MEMBER OF CONGRESS: On Thursday, = February 27,=20 the House of Representatives will choose between the Human Cloning = Prohibition=20 Act (H.R. 534), authored by Congressmen Weldon and Stupak, and a = radically=20 different--indeed, antihetical--substitute amendment to be offered by=20 Congressman Greenwood. The National Right to Life Committee (NRLC) = supports H.R.=20 534. Because enactment of the Greenwood policy would be a giant step in = the=20 pro-cloning direction--it would give the green light to what President = Bush=20 called human ``embryo farms''--NRLC strongly urges you to vote ``no'' on = the=20 Greenwood Substitute. The roll call on the Greenwood Substitute will be = included=20 as a key vote in the NRLC congressional scorecard for 2003.=20

The Weldon-Stupak bill (H.R. 534), which NRLC = supports,=20 would ban any use of cloning to create human embryos. In contrast, the = Greenwood=20 Substitute would permit (indeed, would encourage) the creation of any = number of=20 human embryos by cloning for the purpose of harvesting their parts. The=20 substitute even leaves open the door--as artificial womb technology = advances--to=20 growing cloned humans to later stages of fetal development for the = harvesting of=20 their tissues and organs, as has already been done with cloned cows and = mice.=20

Supporters of the Greenwood Substitute assert that = it would=20 ``ban reproductive cloning,'' but this claim is highly misleading, = because the=20 Greenwood Substitute does not restrict the actual act of human = cloning--the use=20 of somatic cell nuclear transfer (SCNT) to create human embryos. Rather, = the=20 Greenwood Substitute would seek to impede the initiation of a pregnancy. = Thus,=20 the Greenwood Substitute bans not human cloning but the survival of = human=20 clones, which is a very different matter.=20

When Mr. Greenwood originally offered his=20 pro-embryo-farming substitute during consideration of the Weldon-Stupak = bill in=20 2001, Dr. Charles Krauthammer wrote a powerful column, ``A Nightmare of = a=20 Bill,'' pointing out its radical implications: www.nrlc.org/Killing=20 XEmbryos/Krauthammer %20on%20Greenwood%20Amendment.pdf=20

On July 31, 2001, the House rejected the Greenwood=20 Substitute (roll call No. 302), before approving the Weldon-Stupak bill = by a=20 margin of 265-162 (roll call No. 304).=20

When language similar to the Greenwood Substitute = was=20 proposed in the Senate, the Bush Administration made it clear that any = such=20 clone-and-kill legislation would face a veto. (See the letter from HHS = Secretary=20 Tommy Thompson's to Senator Sam Brownback, here: = http://www.nrlc.org/killing=20 Xembryos/ThompsontoBrownback.pdf)=20

Moreover, the Justice Department submitted = testimony=20 explaining that once countless human embryos are created by cloning, = there would=20 be no practical way to enforce the prohibition on transferring such = embryos into=20 wombs. The testimony is here: http://www.nrcl.org/killing = Xembryos/Justice XDept=20 Xon Xcloning.pdf.=20

We would add that in our view, there also would be = no=20 ethical way to enforce such a prohibition, which would amount to a = federal law=20 requiring the death of a class of members of the species Homo sapiens.=20

On January 22, President Bush said, ``I also urge = the=20 Congress to ban all human cloning. We must not create life to destroy = life.=20 Human beings are not research material to be used in a cruel and = reckless=20 experiment.'' In his January 28 State of the Union address, the = President's call=20 to act before what he has aptly called human ``embryo farms'' open for = business=20 in the United States.=20

Some supporters of the Greenwood Substitute claim = that it=20 would allow only ``research on unfertilized eggs,'' and that cloning = does not=20 really create a human embryo. But this is nonsense. Authorities as = diverse as=20 President Clinton's bioethics panel, NIH, and research that somatic cell = nuclear=20 transfer (SCNT) with human genetic material will create human = embryos--until=20 recently, when they decided to try to hide the embryo for political = purposes.=20 (Here are some quotes from various pro-cloning and neutral=20 authorities:http://www.nrlc.org/killing Xembryos/factsheetembryo.html)=20

The Weldon-Stupak bill does not place any = restrictions on=20 research on human ``eggs,'' unfertilized or otherwise. As any middle = school=20 biology student knows any dictionary will confirm, a human ``egg'' = (ovum) is a=20 gamete cell, possessing only 23 chromosomes. While an egg cell is = produced by=20 the female, the egg cell itself has no sex. But once one has a complete = nucleus=20 that is activated (whether through sexual fertilization somatic cell = nuclear=20 transfer), then one had a developing embryo, not an ``egg cell.'' There = is no=20 such thing as a five-day-old or two-week-old ``egg'' that is developing, = has 46=20 chromosomes, and may as easily be male or female. That describes only a = human=20 embryo. As for the claim that the Greenwood Substitute would only permit = research on ``unfertilized'' embryos, this is just another word trick = aimed at=20 the gullible. Of course human embryos produced by cloning will be=20 ``unfertilized,'' because that is what cloning is--asexual reproduction, = reproduction, without fertilization by sperm. Every cloned animal in the = world=20 was ``unfertilized'' from the one-celled embryo stage, and every one of = them=20 will be ``unfertilized'' on the day they die. And if a member of the = species=20 Homo sapiens is created by cloning, is implanted in a womb, is born, and = lives=20 to be 25 years old, she will still be ``unfertilized.'' But she will be = human.=20

Some supporters of the Greenwood Substitute claim = that the=20 Welden-Stupak bill DNA. This is false. The Weldon-Stupak bill (at = Section 2,=20 (d)) explicitly allows the use of cloning techniques to produce cells, = tissues,=20 or organs, whenever this can be done without first creating a human = embryo.=20

Moreover, the Weldon-Stupak bill does not speak to = the=20 separate issue of the use of frozen human embryos, created through in = vitro=20 fertilization, for medical research on stem cells or for any other = research=20 purposes. The restrictions of the Weldon-Stupak bill apply only to: (1) = the use=20 of the somatic cell nuclear transfer (SCNT) cloning technique, to = produce (2) a=20 human embryo.=20

Despite the efforts of some to confuse the cloning = debate=20 with the separate issue of stem cell research, even Mr. Greenwood = conceded,=20 during the 2001 debate, ``The gentleman from Florida (Mr. WELDON) = did not=20 bring a bill to the floor to ban embryonic stem cell research.''=20

A more detailed critique of the misleading claims = that some=20 are making on behalf of the Greenwood Substitute and the similar = Hatch-Feinstein=20 bill (S. 303) is posted here:=20 http://www.nrlc.org/killing--embryos/cloningbackrounder021003.html=20

In conclusion, NRLC strongly urges that you oppose = the=20 Greenwood Substitute, and support without amendment the Weldon-Stupak = Human=20 Cloning Prohibition Act (H.R. 534). Thank you for your consideration of = NRLC's=20 perspective on this critical issue.=20

Sincerely,
DOUGLAS JOHNSON,=20

Legislative Director,
National = Right to=20 Life Committee.=20

Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Chairman, I yield 30 seconds to = the=20 gentleman from New York (Mr. Nadler).=20

[Time: 14:45]

Mr. NADLER. Mr. Chairman, if one is quoting from = Moses, one=20 might note that in the same five books of Moses that contain the Ten=20 Commandments there is a passage that says if a man smites a woman and = she die,=20 he shall surely die, and if he smites her and her fetus dies, she shall = pay=20 monetary compensation, showing at least the Biblical view that a fetus = at some=20 stage of development is not a person and not subject to being murdered.=20

[Page: H1411]

The heart of this debate is whether you are = creating a=20 human being when you are creating an embryo.=20

Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Chairman, I yield 4 minutes to the = distinguished gentleman from California (Mr. Waxman), a Member = of the=20 Committee on Energy and Commerce.=20

Mr. WAXMAN. Mr. Chairman, 104 years ago today, on = February=20 27, 1899, the man who would make one of the most important discoveries = in modern=20 medicine was born in the town of West Pembroke, Maine. His name was = Charles H.=20 Best, and he would help identify insulin, the treatment that has saved = the lives=20 of millions of diabetics around the world. Let us not celebrate Dr. = Best's=20 birthday today by voting to block scientific research that aims to cure = diabetes=20 in our lifetime.=20

The bill before the House is called the Human = Cloning=20 Prohibition Act of 2003. This legislation could also be named the Impede = Stem=20 Cell Research Act of 2003. This proposal would bar the creation of some = of the=20 stem cells that our Nation's top scientists believe could help cure many = devastating diseases.=20

The National Institutes of Health, for example, has = found=20 that stem cells can be coaxed into producing insulin, offering a = possible cure=20 for diabetes. According to the NIH, stem cells may also help restore = lost=20 function to people who are paralyzed and may strengthen the heart = muscles of=20 people who have had severe heart attacks.=20

There are several ways to make stem cells. One of = the most=20 promising ways uses a patient's own DNA via a process called therapeutic = cloning. The National Academy of Sciences has found that this approach = offers=20 great potential to obtain stem cells to treat many diseases, including=20 Alzheimer's, cancer, autoimmune disorders, rheumatoid arthritis. = Countries=20 around the world, including the United Kingdom, have not only found this = research to be promising, but are planning to invest in it.=20

Not the United States. In the summer of 2001, = President=20 Bush told the American people that he would permit Federal funding of = research=20 on 64 existing stem cell lines. Today, the NIH says that just 9 are = actually=20 available to researchers. President Bush's decision did not strike a = fair=20 balance. To the contrary, it has starved promising research to satisfy = an=20 ideological agenda.=20

The legislation before us would actually = criminalize stem=20 cell research based on therapeutic cloning. Does it make any sense to = lock up=20 scientists who are seeking cures for diseases? Not even a majority of = President=20 Bush's handpicked Ethics Advisory Committee reached the conclusion that = the=20 creation of stem cells through therapeutic cloning is unethical. Yet = this bill=20 would treat scientists trying to save lives as if they were drug = dealers.=20

There is a far better alternative. We will have = before us a=20 substitute amendment. It would outlaw cloning of human embryos for the = purpose=20 of producing a child. That issue is not in dispute. But the substitute = would not=20 also stop promising microscopic stem cell research. This substitute = strikes a=20 balance that respects both the sanctity of life and the needs of the = living. A=20 similar balance was struck recently in California law passed to = encourage=20 life-saving research using stem cells.=20

I urge my colleagues to remember Dr. Best's = birthday today.=20 Insulin transformed medicine over the past century. We should give = scientists=20 the tools and room to make new miracles in the next one.=20

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes = to the=20 gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Forbes).=20

Mr. FORBES. Mr. Chairman, I would first like to = thank the=20 chairman for yielding me time and for his hard work on this bill.=20

Mr. Chairman, as a cosponsor of the bill before us, = I am=20 pleased to see the House quickly acting on this important bill. Today we = are=20 taking an important step in affirming the uniqueness and dignity of = every human=20 being.=20

Human cloning represents the first footstep into a = dark=20 wilderness from which we may never emerge. University of Chicago = Professor Leon=20 Kass, who is also the chairman of the President's Council on Bioethics, = has=20 written that human cloning would be a fateful step toward ``making man = himself=20 simply another one of the man-made things. Human nature becomes merely = the last=20 part of nature to succumb to the technological project which turns all = of nature=20 into raw material at human disposal.''=20

The last century and a half is blood-soaked with = examples=20 of what happens when men are subjugated to the will of other men. In our = vain=20 quest for immortality, will we simply regard cloned babies as = meaningless blobs=20 of cells and tissue mass that we can dispose of without any burden to = our=20 conscience?=20

For those who say we should create embryos for = medical=20 research, my own father suffers from Parkinson's disease. While I = recognize the=20 agony of so many Americans with devastating illnesses and injuries, we = must=20 search for ways to ease their suffering without destroying human life. = We must=20 promote methods of scientific research that increase our quality of life = without=20 forsaking the value of human life in its most vulnerable form.=20

Cloning diminishes human reproduction from a loving = act=20 between two parents to a cold exercise of producing parentless children. = Life is=20 a gift. It is not ours to manufacture to our predetermined criteria. I = shudder=20 to think of the consequences of turning the creation into the creator.=20

If we allow human cloning to proceed as a = mainstream=20 scientific endeavor, we may soon find out what C.S. Lewis meant when he=20 observed, ``Man's conquest of nature would result in the abolition of = man.''=20

Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time = as I=20 may consume.=20

Mr. Chairman, I would note before yielding to my = colleague=20 from California a letter received from the Senior Pastor of the = Riverside=20 Baptist Church and the Legislative Director of the United Church of = Christ,=20 where it is said, ``While it is imperative that we as a Nation and as a = people=20 of faith proceed with caution, it is also important that we do what we = can to=20 alleviate the suffering of others. We believe that to ban this = potentially=20 life-saving research would be a mistake.''=20

I think it is important that we recognize the = diversity of=20 religious viewpoints on when life begins and not impose just one = viewpoint on=20 the country.=20

Mr. Chairman, I include for the RECORD the = letter=20 referred to.=20

February 26, 2003.
Hon. JAMES=20 GREENWOOD,
House of Representatives, =
Washington,=20 DC.=20

DEAR CONGRESSMAN GREENWOOD: As members of = the=20 religious community, we would like to commend you for your leadership on = stem=20 cell research. Your recognition of the great promise of stem cell = research and=20 your support for legislation that allows therapeutic cloning offer great = hope=20 for those suffering from juvenile diabetes, Alzheimer's disease, = Parkinson's=20 disease, spinal cord injuries, and other ailments.=20

This is a difficult issue for all of us, and we = understand=20 the complex decision you face in considering any legislation that = involves human=20 cloning. While it is imperative that we as a nation and as people of = faith=20 proceed with great caution, it is also important to do what we can to = alleviate=20 the suffering of others. Therefore, we believe that to ban this = potentially=20 life-saving research would be a mistake.=20

Like most, we are opposed to the practice of = reproductive=20 human cloning. A ban on this practice would be both welcome and = appropriate.=20 Therapeutic cloning, however, requires careful review. We are pleased = that you=20 considered this issue in its entirety and took into account the = countless=20 individuals who could be saved and whose pain could be alleviated by = this=20 medical research. We have a duty to do what we can to help our fellow = man, and=20 you have demonstrated your commitment to doing so through your = leadership on=20 this issue.=20

Sincerely,=20

Rabbi Hershel Billet,

President, Rabbinical Council of America, New York, NY. =

Rev. Dr. Joan Brown Campbell,

Director of Religion, Chautauqua Institution, Chautauqua, = NY.=20

Rev. Dr. Michael Bledsoe,

Senior Pastor, Riverside Baptist Church, Adjunct Professor, = Howard=20 University School of Divinity, Washington, DC.

Rev. Dr. Pat Conover,

Legislative Director, United Church of Christ, Justice and = Witness=20 Ministries, Washington, DC.

Rev. Dr. Charles S. Milligan,=20

[Page: H1412]

Ordained Minister, United Church of Christ, Professor = Emeritus,=20 Iliff School of Theology, Theologian in Residence, Washington Park UCC = Church,=20 Denver, CO.

Rev. Dr. George F. Regas,

Rector Emeritus, All Saints Church, Pasadena, CA. =

Rev. Dr. J. Philip Wogaman,

Former Senior Minister, Foundry United Methodist Church, = Washington,=20 DC.

Mr. Chairman, I am delighted to yield 3 minutes to = the=20 gentlewoman from California (Ms. Eshoo), a distinguished member = of the=20 Committee on Energy and Commerce.=20

Ms. ESHOO. Mr. Chairman, I thank my distinguished = colleague=20 for yielding me time.=20

Mr. Chairman, I want to use these 3 minutes to talk = about=20 the science that the substitute, H.R. 801, preserves, and exactly what = somatic=20 cell nuclear transfer is.=20

The American people are tuned in today and they are = listening to this discussion and they deserve to get some facts.=20

First, a woman donates an egg cell and a patient = donates a=20 skin cell. The nucleus is removed from the woman's egg cell and in its = place the=20 nucleus from the patient's skin cell is inserted. The egg is then = stimulated to=20 induce it to divide. Once the egg divides, it begins creating stem cells = that=20 are identical to the patient's own cells.=20

This is regenerative medicine, it is not = fertilization.=20 Children are created by the fertilization of an egg cell by sperm, not = by=20 chemical stimulation.=20

Stem cell research is research on the most = fundamental part=20 of the human system, cells that can become any other type of cell in the = body.=20 Because of their ability to develop into liver cells, pancreatic cells, = spinal=20 cells, any kind of cell, stem cells are critical to researchers who are = trying=20 to cure a whole host of diseases.=20

What researchers are focusing on today is how these = stem=20 cells become other types of cells. There are some types of protein or = chemicals=20 that stimulate stem cells to become spinal cells. Scientists just do not = know=20 what proteins or chemicals they are.=20

Somatic cell nuclear transfer or therapeutic = cloning is an=20 important part of this process because scientists are still learning how = to use=20 the cell from inside the patient's cheek to turn it back into a stem = cell, and=20 then reprogram it to become a liver cell that revitalizes the liver = damaged by=20 cancer. That is what this discussion is about today.=20

There are two proposals. They both outlaw human = cloning. It=20 is unethical. It is wrong. We all agree to that. But only one bill = preserves=20 science and research to accomplish what I just outlined.=20

So I urge my colleagues to protect the research. Do = not=20 criminalize scientists. That would be wrong in our great Nation. We can = preserve=20 and protect the sanctity of what we want to protect, to outlaw human = cloning,=20 but we should move ahead and be the America that we have always been, to = embrace=20 research, to embrace innovation and to help those who are suffering in = our=20 country today.=20

Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support the=20 substitute and to oppose the underlying bill.=20

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 90 = seconds.=20

Mr. Chairman, what we just heard seems to indicate = that the=20 material we are talking about is ``just an egg.'' I would like to quote = from Dr.=20 John Gerhart, who is on the other side of this issue, he comes from = Johns=20 Hopkins University, at a press conference that was held yesterday by the = gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Greenwood) and the supporters = of his=20 amendment.=20

Dr. Gerhart said, ``I contend it is an embryo. I = don't=20 think anybody is saying that it is just an egg.''=20

This follows along with what President Clinton's = National=20 Bioethics Advisory Commission stated in June of 1997. The executive = summary=20 says, ``The Commission begins its discussions fully recognizing that any = effort=20 in humans to transfer a somatic cell nucleus into an enucleated egg = involves the=20 creation of an embryo, with the apparent potential to be implanted in = utero and=20 developed to term.''=20

Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman = from=20 Pennsylvania (Ms. Hart).=20

Ms. HART. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of H.R. = 534, the=20 Human Cloning Prohibition Act.=20

People agree that cloning humans is wrong. The = recent scare=20 that we all went through regarding an organization called Clonaid = brought=20 revulsion to everyone who heard the story that there may have been a = cloned=20 embryo implanted into a woman and there may be a child as a result. = People=20 across the globe were upset by this possibility.=20

The only way for us to avoid this possibility is to = completely ban cloning. Once that clone is created, how do we control = what is=20 done with that embryo? The only effective means to prevent having a = cloned human=20 is to ban cloning.=20

As for the claims we have heard today as for the = need for=20 this process to cure disease, there is no evidence that therapeutic = cloning has=20 produced a single cure. Not only has it failed in animal research, it = has failed=20 also in human research.=20

Scientific ethics requires that we draw a line. We = draw a=20 line in research every day as far as science goes. The fear that we = could tread=20 in territory that would create a cloned human being is enough to prevent = us from=20 allowing cloning at all.=20

We need to maintain these ethical principles that = guide=20 scientific research and inquiries. Frankly, the costs are too high to = our=20 society if we do not do it. We have heard the statistic before that = between 95=20 and 98 percent of cloning in animals fails. This could translate into = countless=20 children who would be products of cloning who would be born with serious = birth=20 defects, debilitating diseases, and shortened, terrible lives.=20

Mr. Chairman, the only solution is to support this = bill as=20 it is and to reject the alternative. H.R. 534 is the only way to prevent = such=20 horrible ideas.=20

Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Chairman, I am happy to yield 3 = minutes to=20 the distinguished gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Watt), my=20 colleague on the Committee on the Judiciary.=20

Mr. WATT. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman for = yielding time.=20

Mr. Chairman, I do serve on the Committee on the = Judiciary=20 and confess that I have talked to a number of my colleagues, not a = single one of=20 which has said to me that they believe in human cloning. I think if = there were a=20 bill on the floor that prohibited human cloning, it would pass 435 to 0. =

[Time: 15:00]

To me, it is somewhat distressing that this bill = has been=20 postured in much the same political context as the abortion debate = around the=20 question of when life begins and in a way that would make it impossible = to do=20 any kind of cloning, even for research or therapeutic research purposes. = And I=20 think the thing that is so distressing about that is that every single = one of us=20 knows someone who needs the benefit of science to come up with a = therapy, a=20 treatment that could prevent or stop the progress of a distressing = disease; and=20 most of the promise is in the area that this bill would prohibit.=20

So I just want to appeal to those people who would = like to=20 make this a political issue, a debate about when life begins, that I = think=20 different religions have different beliefs about that, and different = individuals=20 have different beliefs about that. The thing that I hope we all agree on = is that=20 when research advancements, therapeutic or otherwise, can make it = possible for=20 people to live their lives with higher quality and for longer periods of = time,=20 or to keep them from dying, we ought to allow that kind of research to = progress=20 and not get into a political debate that serves somebody's political = purpose.=20

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes = to the=20 gentleman from Florida (Mr. Weldon), the author of the bill.=20

Mr. WELDON of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I thank the = gentleman=20 for yielding me this time, and I want to commend him for his leadership = on this=20 very, very important and critical issue.=20

As I mentioned in the debate on the rule, the = science on=20 so-called therapeutic cloning is going nowhere, so=20

[Page: H1413]

why do all of these scientists = say that they=20 want to allow embryo cloning? Why do all of these biotechnology = companies say=20 they want to allow embryo cloning, even though the chairman of Geron, = Thomas=20 Okarma, is quoted on the issue of therapeutic cloning, and he is quoted = as=20 saying, ``The odds favoring success are vanishingly small, and the costs = are=20 daunting. It would take thousands of human eggs on an assembly line to = produce a=20 custom therapy for a single person.''=20

He goes on to say, ``This process is a = nonstarter.''=20

So if this therapeutic cloning is such a nonstarter = as=20 Okarma says, why do the people in the biotech industries, why do all of = these=20 scientists say we have to allow this, we have to make this legal? What = is the=20 rationale behind all of this?=20

I will tell my colleagues what they want to do. = They want=20 to create human models of disease. Research scientists today in America, = if they=20 want to do research on Parkinson's, Alzheimer's, diabetes, they buy mice = and=20 they buy rats that have been engineered to manifest that disease, and = what they=20 want to do is they want to create human beings that are engineered to = manifest=20 these diseases.=20

Now, can we imagine that? They want to have shelves = with=20 diseases on them filled with human embryos and sell them for a profit to = research labs, and that is where we are going with this issue.=20

Some people get up and ridicule this concept of a = slippery=20 slope, but that is exactly what we are on. Because I will tell my = colleagues=20 what is next. The artificial womb technology is there. It is available = to us=20 today. One can take these embryos and put them in these baths and one = can grow=20 them well beyond the embryonic stage, and that will be the next thing we = will be=20 debating and talking about in this Chamber if the positions held by some = people=20 who want to allow embryo cloning are allowed to move forward.=20

These are the same exact arguments that occurred in = this=20 House on fetal tissue research 10 years ago; and people got up and = claimed, we=20 have to allow this, it is the great potential of the future. It turned = out to be=20 an absolute bust. It was a disaster. It went absolutely nowhere. = Therapeutic=20 cloning is going nowhere. It has been a year and a half since we = originally=20 debated this issue. I placed a mountain of evidence before this body = here=20 showing that the adult stem cells are working out great, the embryo stem = cells=20 are going nowhere, the cloned stem cells are going absolutely nowhere. = So why=20 are we still here? Why are we debating this issue? It is because there = are=20 people who want to create human models of disease that they can sell for = a=20 profit. It is an abomination.=20

Vote for this bill. Vote against the substitute.=20

Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Chairman, I am very honored to = yield 2=20 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Holt), a = distinguished=20 scientist and Member of this House.=20

Mr. HOLT. Mr. Chairman, as a scientist, I must say = extreme=20 conviction seems to be crowding out understanding here today. I would = like to=20 cut through the scientific rhetoric of this biomedical research = technique and=20 discuss the real progress in this area. But in the limited time = available, let=20 me draw the choice as sharply as possible.=20

Down one road we see potential therapeutic cloning = to help=20 cure diseases from Parkinson's to Alzheimer's; down the other road we = see=20 unprecedented criminalization of scientific research.=20

Now, therapeutic cloning is not some far-out = technique=20 conducted on the fringe of the scientific community. These researchers = are not=20 crazed Dr. Frankensteins. They are people like our neighbors, highly = ethical who=20 are working hard to save lives, to relieve suffering, to improve the = quality of=20 life. Let us not make them criminals.=20

Now, to draw the distinction here, particularly = referring=20 to my colleague's reference to a slippery slope, in vitro fertilization = has been=20 hailed as a miracle of modern science allowing millions of American = couples to=20 conceive. However, by necessity of the in vitro fertilization procedure, = some=20 human embryos are created that will not be given the chance to develop = into=20 babies. Are we to say here today that we want to outlaw in vitro = fertilization?=20 IVF is not only accepted, it is enthusiastically embraced. It is a God = send for=20 millions of families. Yes, millions of families. Therapeutic cloning is = no more=20 ethically objectionable than IVF.=20

Now, I asked the proponents of this bill, do you = question=20 the ethics of the parents of those million Americans alive today through = the=20 miracle of IVF? They may, but let us not command their beliefs to become = law.=20

The majority of my constituents, the majority of = Americans,=20 all scientific researchers I know, agree that human reproductive cloning = would=20 be unsafe, unethical, and should not be allowed. The Greenwood = substitute is=20 every bit as effective as H.R. 534 in keeping scientists from creating = genetic=20 duplicates of people. Regardless of which bill is passed today, millions = of=20 human embryos will be created.=20

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes = to the=20 gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Sullivan).=20

Mr. SULLIVAN. Mr. Chairman, today I rise in support = of H.R.=20 534, the Human Cloning Prohibition Act, a bill to ban all types of human = cloning.=20

I believe human cloning is ethically and morally = wrong. It=20 is an unjust experiment whereby human beings are created and destroyed = solely=20 for the purpose of research. Human beings cannot be treated as material = used for=20 scientific research, and the cloning of human babies turns the natural=20 procreation process into the simple manufacturing of human beings.=20

It has been determined that human cloning is = entirely=20 unsafe to practice on human beings. Most scientists agree that human = cloning=20 poses a serious risk of producing children who are stillborn, unhealthy, = severely malformed, or disabled.=20

The fact is, in animal cloning trials, 95 to 98 = percent of=20 all cloning attempts have ended in failure, and almost all successfully = cloned=20 animals have genetic abnormalities. In fact, Dolly, the infamous cloned = sheep,=20 died this past Valentine's Day of a lung disease she acquired before she = was=20 even born, and lived only half of the normal life expectancy for a = sheep. Why=20 would we even consider for a moment that cloning is safe for humans?=20

I agree with President Bush when he stated no human = life=20 should be started or ended as an object of an experiment.=20

When debating this issue, we must ask the ethical = question:=20 Are we created in God's image, or are we created in our own? Today, this = House=20 has a unique opportunity to shut the door on this invasive procedure to = women=20 and an affront to humanity. I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of the = Weldon=20 bill, to set a precedent for morality and the sanctity of humanity.=20

Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Chairman, I am honored to yield 1 = 1/2=20 minutes to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Kind), a leader of = the New=20 Democrats and someone who has distinguished himself on the issue of = medical=20 research.=20

Mr. KIND. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman = from=20 California for the leadership that she has shown on this issue as well.=20

Mr. Chairman, let us be clear again yet today. This = is not=20 a fight about banning human cloning. We all agree cloning for purposes = of=20 creating another human being is wrong and it should be prohibited.=20

Instead, what we are arguing about is allowing = scientific=20 research to continue that can lead to cures for Alzheimer's, = Parkinson's,=20 diabetes, spinal cord injuries. Unfortunately, H.R. 534's approach would = take a=20 Howitzer after a house fly.=20

What about bone marrow transplants? What about in = vitro=20 fertilization? If we logically extend the argument for H.R. 534, that is = next.=20

Some of the most advanced and exciting stem cell = research=20 in the world is occurring at the University of Wisconsin. I have had the = opportunity over a few occasions to visit their research department; and = while=20 the research they are doing there itself is exciting, what is most = impressive is=20 how much in tandem the researchers of the science and the ethics = department=20 work.=20

What most people do not realize on this subject is = that=20 therapeutic stem cell research is already a heavily regulated industry. = The FDA=20 has strict requirements on what they can and cannot do.=20

[Page: H1414]

But my main point is this: we need to do this if = for no=20 other reason than to provide leadership for the rest of the world. I am = more=20 comfortable knowing that our country, our researchers, our FDA is = providing=20 oversight and guidance on this discovery which could lead almost = anywhere. Lets=20 make sure that with our leadership, the discoveries will be used for the = betterment of human kind rather than for nefarious purposes.=20

Mr. Chairman, I urge passage of the substitute and=20 rejection of H.R. 534.=20

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes = to the=20 gentleman from Texas (Mr. Burgess).=20

Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to support = H.R. 534=20 and speak against the substitute. I believe that combining a somatic = nucleus=20 with a donor cell is inherently dangerous. It is inhumane to create a = life form=20 that is vulnerable to a host of disabilities and genetic malformations.=20

As a doctor, I find it very difficult to support a = reckless=20 procedure whose scientific merits are unsound, at best. Even more = pernicious are=20 the implications that this substitute amendment would have for humanity. = So-called therapeutic cloning is virtually identical to reproductive = cloning.=20

Human cloning for reproduction will result in high = failure=20 rates. What do those words mean, a high failure rate? They mean that = children=20 will be produced that are stillborn, malformed, and disabled.=20

The proponents of this substitute would make us = think that=20 stem cell research would be entirely restricted. As a scientist, = successful=20 alternatives such as adult stem cell research and umbilical cord stem = cell=20 research have already been used successfully in human trials. We must = prohibit=20 both human somatic nuclear transfer and research cloning.=20

The country is looking for us for leadership on = this very=20 important issue. Anything short of a complete prohibition is = unacceptable. I=20 urge my colleagues to vote against the substitute and for H.R. 534.=20

Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the=20 gentlewoman from Illinois (Ms. Schakowsky), who has led efforts = to=20 promote science in this regard.=20

[Time: 15:15]

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in = opposition to=20 H.R. 534 and in support of the Greenwood-Deutsch substitute. H.R. 534 = squashes=20 the hopes of parents and their families who wake up every day hoping = cures to=20 the ailments for which they suffer will have been found.=20

I speak for Teresa, a mom from my district who = urged me to=20 support ongoing somatic cell nuclear transfer research. She told me = about her=20 13-year-old son, Andrew, with type I diabetes who has to check his blood = sugar=20 level and inject himself with insulin repeatedly throughout the day and = night.=20 ``Even with the most vigilant care, he is bound to suffer traumatic=20 complications from this horrible disease. No child should have to deal = with a=20 condition like this.''=20

I speak for my dear friend, Bonnie Wilson, and her=20 daughter, Jennifer, who also lives every day with juvenile diabetes.=20

Fortunately, doctors are learning more every day = about how=20 to treat and eventually cure diseases such as diabetes, Parkinson's,=20 Alzheimer's, using somatic cell nuclear transfer. Yet, H.R. 534 aims to = take=20 away these research opportunities, and in the end, take hope from Teresa = and=20 Andrew, Bonnie and Jennifer.=20

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes = to the=20 gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Baker).=20

Mr. BAKER. Mr. Chairman, I wish to address some = comments=20 made earlier in the debate where a vote for this bill was characterized = as=20 eliminating the only hope for the suffering and the dying. I just hope = that that=20 is an insensitive representation, and not based on a true understanding = of the=20 issue.=20

By voting for this bill, Members are not casting = themselves=20 as scientific Luddites nor moral zealots; they are merely saying there = are=20 alternatives that are existent in the current scientific community that = are=20 relevant to developing the cures and promises that have been held out by = that of=20 embryonic research but not yet fulfilled.=20

Much of the limitations on embryonic research's = success has=20 come from the results of cellular meiosis. When the cell has divided, = those=20 genetic defaults it would sometimes trigger that were developed to = terminate are=20 artificially preserved, thereby limiting the effectiveness of the = embryonic cell=20 line, which has been touted as the only hope for medical survivability.=20

Other than that, placental embryonic and cord blood = research has moved far beyond clinical research, and in fact now there = is a=20 corporation within my own district that is in the process of marketing = products.=20 For example, a corneal implant used after surgery produced from stem = cells, put=20 over the surgical incision, does not have to be removed because it is=20 incorporated into the body. Stem cells from placental research inserted = after a=20 myocardial infarction has provided 100 percent recovery of heart = function. The=20 list goes on and on and on.=20

By voting for this bill, Members are not religious = zealots,=20 not scientific Luddites, but they are merely saying that the issue of = cloning is=20 entirely different from stem cell research. There are avenues highly = successful,=20 highly provable, and I can take anyone who cares to see it to Baton = Rouge,=20 Louisiana, and walk through the halls of this facility where this = research has=20 moved beyond where human suffering has been responded to and addressed, = and=20 offers the hope and promise that all of us seek with the passage of this = bill.=20

Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Chairman, I am happy to yield 1 = 1/2=20 minutes to the gentleman from Vermont (Mr. Sanders).=20

Mr. SANDERS. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman = for=20 yielding time to me.=20

Mr. Chairman, today we live in an age of exploding=20 technological advances. Many of these new technologies offer the = potential to=20 improve the lives of people in the United States and around the world.=20

But, Mr. Chairman, some of this new technology also = has the=20 potential to do great harm to our people and to our environment. All too = often,=20 these dangers are magnified because the owners of technology are = primarily=20 interested in how much money they can make, rather than the betterment = of=20 society.=20

We have seen this in the area of genetically = modified=20 organisms that are finding their way into our food supply in the U.S. = The=20 legislation we are considering today concerns an even more important = issue;=20 namely, the cloning of human life itself. While I support stem cell = research,=20 the cloning of a human being for any purpose raises the deepest and most = profound ethical and moral questions: questions about the sanctity or = the=20 uniqueness of each human person; questions about the evil of eugenics = and=20 genetic engineering in humans; and, equally important, questions about = the=20 ownership and use of cloned humans by an unregulated corporate = biotechnology=20 industry motivated almost exclusively by their quest for venture = capital,=20 short-term profits, and higher stock prices.=20

The speed with which human cloning technology has = developed=20 thus far has far outpaced our abilities as a society to wrestle with = these=20 questions.=20

Mr. Chairman, technology should not drive ethics = and=20 morality in this country and on this planet; ethics and morality should = frame=20 the acceptable limits of our use of technology. That is why I strongly = support=20 H.R. 534, which would ban all human cloning.=20

Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Chairman, I am happy to yield 2 = minutes to=20 the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Green), a member of the Committee = on=20 Commerce.=20

Mr. GREEN of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I thank my = colleague, the=20 gentlewoman from California, for yielding time to me.=20

Mr. Chairman, there are few decisions more = difficult than=20 the one we are making today. If it were simply a debate about human = cloning, I=20 doubt that we would have one vote for it. I think the vote would be 435 = to zero.=20

I think we are all troubled by the recent media = reports by=20 the Raelians about attempting to clone a human being. Human cloning is a = horrifying practice that should be banned, and people like the Raelians = should=20 be stopped.=20

But this legislation is more than human cloning. = There is=20 an exciting field of research known as therapeutic cloning that can = potentially=20 cure diseases and conditions such as diabetes,=20

[Page: H1415]

Parkinson's disease, spinal = cord injuries,=20 organ failure, Alzheimer's, and other life-threatening illnesses. Who of = us has=20 not had a constituent or family member touched by one of these illnesses = so that=20 we would be willing to do whatever research possible to end their = suffering?=20

We have heard amazing testimony from scientific = experts who=20 have made a compelling case for therapeutic cloning. They tell me that=20 individuals currently receiving organ transplants may endure toxic=20 immunosuppressive drugs in order to stay alive; but by cloning tissues = and=20 organs, nerve cells and other cells, we can provide a genetic duplicate = that the=20 body would not reject. If this technology is developed, we could cure = any=20 disease that involves the damage or deterioration of tissues and cells. = There=20 are very few diseases that do not fall in this category. This is the = most=20 promising approach for millions of Americans whose suffering could end = if=20 therapeutic cloning is allowed. That is why I support the Greenwood = substitute.=20

Many oppose cloning because they believe it is not = allowed=20 in their religious beliefs. The Greenwood substitute prohibits human = cloning but=20 it allows for our God-given intelligence to make our world a healthier = and safer=20 and less painful place.=20

As Christians, I hope that is our mission and our = prayer,=20 to eliminate human suffering. That is why I hope my colleagues will join = me in=20 supporting the Greenwood substitute and give hope to these individuals.=20

Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself my final = 30=20 seconds.=20

Mr. Chairman, I urge a no vote on this bill. We = have taken=20 a consensus and we all agree that human cloning should be outlawed and = warped it=20 into a vehicle to impose one religious viewpoint on the scientists of = this=20 country. Not only is this wrong, but it will force scientists to flee = our=20 shores, will bring down the veil of ignorance to our country, and will = remove us=20 as having the leading scientific edge in the world for this = biotechnology=20 research.=20

I urge all Members to vote no.=20

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the = balance=20 of my time.=20

The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr.=20 Sensenbrenner) is recognized for 2 1/2 minutes.=20

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, during this = general debate=20 we have heard from the opponents of this legislation that scientific = research=20 would come to a screeching halt if a ban on cloning of human embryos is = enacted.=20 There would be no more stem cell research, there would be no in vitro=20 fertilization, and on and on and on.=20

Nothing could be further from the truth. The bill = itself in=20 section 302(d) says, and I quote, ``Nothing in this section restricts = areas of=20 scientific research not specifically prohibited by this section, = including=20 research in the use of nuclear transfer or other cloning techniques to = produce=20 molecules, DNA, cells other than human embryos, tissues, organs, plants, = or=20 animals other than humans.''=20

What this section says is that all of this type of=20 scientific research that is going on now will be able to continue as = long as=20 cloned human embryos are not used. That is a big difference. If a = scientist=20 wants to create human embryos and peddle them around the world and = around this=20 country to make a profit, that will be prohibited. But if a scientist = wants to=20 do scientific research, including stem cell research, on material other = than=20 cloned human embryos, which include adult stem cells, then that will be = able to=20 continue to proceed.=20

This bill draws a line, a very reasonable line, = between=20 science and ethics. That reasonable line is whether a cloned human = embryo is=20 used. Should a cloned human embryo be created and used, yes, this bill=20 criminalizes it, as it should; but if the research uses any other = material=20 besides cloned human embryos, the criminal penalties of this bill do not = apply,=20 and that research will be able to proceed.=20

I would hope that the Members of this House will = listen to=20 the fine points of this debate and ignore allegations that have been = made that=20 are not contained in the bill, and pass it.=20

[Begin Insert]

Mr. COOPER. Mr. Chairman, I, like most Americans, = am=20 strongly opposed to human cloning. It is wrong to try to duplicate human = beings.=20 But it is important, as we ban human cloning, that we do not prevent = legitimate=20 scientific research into life-saving therapies that can mean so much to = human=20 life. All of us have friends who suffer from Alzheimer's, diabetes, = stroke,=20 Parkinson's, heart disease, liver failure, end-stage renal disease, = rheumatoid=20 arthritis, osteoporosis, burns, multiple sclerosis, brain damage, Lou = Gehrig's=20 disease and lupus. Americans who suffer from these diseases should not = be told=20 that Congress has stopped the search for a cure for their diseases, and = that=20 they will have to move to another country to have any hope.=20

One of the great achievements of Congress in the = last=20 several years has been to boost NIH funding to accelerate the discovery = of cures=20 for many of these dread diseases. It would be a mistake to put NIH and = other=20 leading research institutions in a legal straight-jacket that prevented=20 legitimate research.=20

Unfortunately, although the Weldon bill commendably = bans=20 human cloning, it also cripples scientific research into = potentially-life saving=20 therapies. That is why I am supporting the Greenwood bill, which bans = human=20 cloning without harming other scientific research. The Greenwood bill = actually=20 has tougher punishments for those who violate its provisions than the = Weldon=20 bill does.=20

There is considerable confusion surrounding this = debate. I=20 have been listening to many people with differing points of view, and = read many=20 articles concerning the bills. One particularly touching conversation = was with a=20 father whose own son has Type I diabetes, and whose opposition to the = human=20 cloning and any related technology is so strong that he is willing to = forego=20 research that could even save his own son's life. For Middle = Tennesseans, the=20 debate is more confused because Senator BILL FRIST, M.D., has = surprised=20 the scientific community by supporting the Weldon bill. It is = interesting to=20 note, however, that Vanderbilt University, the institution where Dr.=20 FRIST worked before entering politics, opposes the Weldon bill = and=20 supported the Greenwood bill. The head of Princeton University, where = Dr.=20 FRIST received his training in pre-medical studies, also opposes = the=20 Weldon bill and supports the Greenwood bill.=20

Having studied this issue closely, I think that the = Greenwood bill hits the target of banning human cloning, without harmful = side-effects. In past congressional debates, such as over research on = DNA,=20 Congress was tempted to pass an overly broad ban, but, fortunately = resisted such=20 temptation. Congress has another such opportunity today: to pass = legislation=20 that achieves the objective of banning human cloning, with out harming = the=20 health care of our people.=20

Finally, it was unfair to the Republican majority = to=20 require a vote on this bill without having held any committee hearings = or=20 received any testimony on it in this Congress. While it was considered = in the=20 previous Congress, there are many new members who do not have the = benefit of=20 those hearings, and even older member lack of updated information that = is=20 available from the scientific community. It is a serious mistake for = Congress to=20 rush complex legislation through without any hearings and with minimal = debate,=20 especially when it could have such a profound impact on the health of = the=20 American people.=20

Mr. ETHERIDGE. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in = opposition to=20 H.R. 534, and in support of the Greenwood substitute.=20

Two years have passed since the House last = considered this=20 complex issue. And in that time, scientists and physicians around the = world have=20 made incredible strides in their efforts to understand and cure diseases = like=20 Alzheimers, diabetes, and cancer. The work our scientists are doing is = truly=20 remarkable and it holds the potential to alleviate human suffering = around the=20 globe. Today, we are considering a bill, which will leave our sickest = patients=20 hopeless at the expense of politics.=20

I oppose reproductive human cloning because it is = morally=20 wrong. But, H.R. 534 goes too far. The Weldon bill would stop all = research=20 initiatives that rely on somatic nuclear cell transfers, just as we are=20 realizing to enormous benefits of this biomedical research. The = Greenwood=20 substitute, in contrast, bans reproductive cloning while allowing this = critical=20 research to continue.=20

As a representative of the Research Triangle Region = of=20 North Carolina, I understand the importance of the research our = scientists are=20 conducting. It has the potential to save the lives of hundreds of = thousands of=20 people who suffer from a number of debilitating diseases.=20

The implications of passing H.R. 534 reach far = beyond the=20 highly emotional and contentious debate of whether or not the creation = of an=20 embryo to be used in medical research constitutes human life. This bill=20 criminalizes medical research that might be the only chance for a cure = for many=20 terrible diseases. While the promise of this biomedical research remains = years=20 away from being perfected and utilized, the Greenwood substitute allows = us to=20 hold on to the hope that we may one day find=20

[Page:=20
H1416]

a cure for leukemia, heart disease, Parkinson's, = spinal=20 cord injuries, and a host of other illnesses.=20

I urge my colleagues to oppose H.R. 534 and vote = for the=20 Greenwood substitute.=20

Mr. MANZULLO. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support = of H.R.=20 534, the Human Cloning Prohibition Act of 2003. Human cloning is = accomplished by=20 a technique called ``somatic cell nuclear transfer.'' One takes the = nucleus from=20 a body (somatic) cell and transfers it into a female egg which has its = nuclear=20 material removed. Using an electric current or chemical stimulus, the = cloned=20 embryo beings to divide as does a fertilized embryo. Thus, the product = of human=20 cloning would be a human embryo, regardless of how the embryo will be = used.=20

Mr. Chairman, I am opposed to human cloning for a = variety=20 of reasons. When animals are cloned, 95-98 percent of the attempts end = in=20 failure, and those that are successful have genetic abnormalities. Most=20 scientists will agree that human cloning poses a serious risk of = producing=20 children who are stillborn, unhealthy, severely malformed or disabled. = Many=20 opponents of this bill think the cloned embryos will produce stem cells = that can=20 be used to cure a variety of ailments. However, there are no models in = animal=20 cloning in which scientists derived stem cells to cure the animals. The = prospect=20 of creating clinical treatments from stem cells derived from cloned = embryos is=20 completely speculative.=20

The attempt to perfect human cloning despite the = high risks=20 of injury would constitute a violation of the fundamental principle of = all human=20 research: DO NO HARM. To proceed on the basis that the eventual benefits = may=20 outweigh the probable harms to woman and child is akin to the Nazi = experiments=20 at Nuremberg. Efforts to create human beings by cloning shift human = reproduction=20 into a manufacturing process in which children are made in laboratories = to=20 preordained specifications and in multiple copies.=20

Human cloning also poses a significant risk to = women's=20 health. In order to create human embryos, great quantities of women's = eggs will=20 be needed. To obtain eggs, women will be injected with supervulatory = drugs and=20 then will undergo an invasive procedure. The risks of this procedure are = just=20 starting to be documented. The side effects from these injections are = known to=20 be abdominal pain and nausea, in three to five percent of cases of=20 hyperstimulation of the ovaries occurs, causing severe abdominal pain, = and on=20 rare occasions surgery is required which may leave the woman infertile.=20

Women of lower economic means are particular = targets for=20 exploitation. Women may be paid to donate their eggs for failed human = cloning=20 experiments. But it will not just be a few women who will be needed. In = order to=20 generate enough cloned embryos to carry out research on the scale that = is=20 envisioned, thousands of eggs will need to be solicited from numerous = women.=20 Just to treat 16 million Parkinson's patients, it is estimated that a = minimum of=20 800 million human eggs would be needed from a minimum of 80 million of=20 childbearing age.=20

I strongly support the development of cell and = tissue-based=20 therapies based on research involving the tissue based on research = involving the=20 cloning techniques to produce molecules, DNA, cells other than human = embryos,=20 tissues, organs, plants, or animals other than humans. Already, these = scientific=20 methods have enabled researchers to develop innovative drugs to treat = diseases=20 such as breast cancer, and aid in treatment techniques for injuries, = such as=20 cloning skin cells for skin grafts. The bill I support restricts the use = of=20 cloning technology only on human embryos.=20

Mr. Chairman, I believe that human life at every = stage of=20 biological development is deserving of respect and protection, = regardless of the=20 circumstances under which that human life was created. That is why I am=20 supporting H.R. 534 and will oppose Mr. Greenwood's substitute = amendment.=20

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I rise = today to=20 speak on H.R. 534. This legislation involves an important public policy = matter=20 and what many would call cutting edge scientific issue: human cloning.=20

We have not held hearings in which we discussed the = ethics=20 of cloning and legislation proposals to impose federal control on the = cloning=20 process. Yet, today we will vote on the Human Cloning Prohibition Act of = 2003,=20 H.R. 534.=20

We all recognize that cloning is a fascinating and=20 promising issue but is certainly an area that needs to be fully = explored. We=20 must carefully balance society's need for lifesaving scientific research = against=20 numerous moral, ethical, social and scientific issues. Reproductive = cloning is=20 almost universally opposed in Congress and the majority of Americans are = not=20 comfortable with the prospect of a human clone.=20

In our rush to ban reproductive cloning, there are = some in=20 Congress who want to close the door on this new research technology, = which may=20 provide critical medical advances. And, one of these innovative areas is = the=20 promise of stem cell research. Stem cell research has the potential to = cure some=20 of the most painful and deadly diseases afflicting our population.=20

H.R. 534 would make it next to impossible to use = stem cell=20 lines to research diseases which are more prevalent in people of = particular=20 racial or ethnic groups, for example, diseases such as sickle cell which = afflict=20 African-Americans, thalassemia which disproportionately affects = Asian-Americans,=20 or Tay-Sachs which is prevalent in the Jewish population.=20

After Congress considered this issue in the 107th = Congress,=20 President Bush issued an order limiting stem cell research to the = approximately=20 seventy stem cell lines existing as of August 9, 2001. A recent = Institute of=20 Medicine study explained that because the cell lines available to = researchers=20 are limited, they do not represent the genetic diversity of the general=20 population nor do they represent the diversity of our population.=20

Diseases that plague minority populations are = almost=20 certainly not represented in the 64 approved stem cell lines. On the = uses of=20 stem cells, the National Institutes of Health described their medical = potential=20 as enormous.=20

The legislation before us is so sweeping that it = would not=20 only ban reproductive cloning but all uses of nuclear transfer--also = known as=20 therapeutic cloning--for research or medical treatment.=20

H.R. 534 goes beyond banning reproductive cloning = to=20 banning research in somatic cell nuclear transfer. The result is that = the bill=20 would cut off scientific developments that are granting hope to millions = of=20 Americans who have been told there is no cure for their diseases.=20

I would note that the legislation's supporters = would have=20 us believe that H.R. 534 has nothing to do with stem cell research and = would not=20 disrupt scientific advances being made in this important and = much-discussed=20 area. I disagree with this argument.=20

I strongly believe that we should provide an = exemption for=20 embryonic cloning for the purpose of creating a genetically diverse stem = cell=20 line.=20

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chairman, cloning for = the=20 purpose of reproduction is wrong, and I am confident my colleagues = agree. I am=20 supporting a proposal, offered as an amendment to H.R. 534, which = clearly=20 outlaws human reproductive cloning while not closing the door on future=20 advancements in scientific research which have the potential to find = cures for=20 degenerative and life threatening diseases. This research is critical to = advancing therapies and cures for diseases such as Parkinson's, = Alzheimer's and=20 diabetes, as well as conditions resulting from spinal and head injuries. =

Most egregious, the underlying bill will halt = important=20 research on cures for these diseases, which kill over 3,000 Americans = each year.=20 The bill goes so far as to even bar the importation of overseas medical=20 treatments developed using cell cloning techniques. Just because this = type of=20 scientific research does not fit the ultra-conservative views of some = members of=20 this body is no reason to withhold potentially life-saving treatments = from=20 millions of Americans suffering from debilitating and life threatening = diseases.=20 These citizens and their families deserve better.=20

This bill is a misplaced application of religious = doctrine,=20 imposing a narrowly held view of science and law on America. We can and = should=20 provide guidelines that prevent reckless experimentation on the = development of=20 humans and prohibit cloning for purposes of human reproduction, but = Congress=20 should not overreach in this area.=20

Ms. CORRINE BROWN of Florida. Mr. Chairman, if I = had been=20 present, I would have voted no on final passage and yes on the = Democratic=20 substitute. I needed to return to my district earlier than planned = because of an=20 urgent matter and because of the weather emergency.=20

I believe that this measure is simply going too far = since=20 it bans all human cloning. This would lead to a terrible stifling of = important=20 scientific research that could potentially have been conducted to save = the lives=20 of countless human beings who suffer from degenerative and = life-threatening=20 illness.=20

The bill is so extensive that it would not only ban = reproductive cloning but also therapeutic cloning for research or = medical=20 treatment. Moreover, it would impede research that is designed to help = those who=20 suffer from a variety of disease such as Alzheimer's, diabetes, = Parkinson's and=20 spinal cord injuries.=20

The bill would make it nearly impossible for our = country to=20 benefit from ongoing stem-cell research. Many people I have spoken with = that are=20 informed on this subject argue that the technology banned by this bill = is vital=20 to any breakthrough in the use of these ``master'' stem cells. Enactment = of this=20 legislation would stop stem cell research in its tracks and deny = Americans the=20 benefit of research that the National Institutes of Health has described = as=20 having ``enormous'' medical potential in the treatment of any number of=20 life-threatening diseases and conditions.=20

[Page: H1417]

Additonally, I believe that those who oppose stem = cell=20 research on ethical grounds are simply misunderstanding the issue. = Currently,=20 there are tens of thousands of frozen embryos already in fertility = clinics=20 around the nation, which, if not used for research, will merely be = destroyed.=20 These are cells that are not yet specialized to perform a specific task, = but can=20 take on the character of virtually any cell in the body. Numerous = studies=20 demonstrate that these cells may be capable of repairing what goes wrong = with=20 other cells, and therefore hold the cure to many horrible diseases and=20 conditions that attack the human body on the cellular level.=20

In my view, not to take advantage of this research = by=20 yielding to the excessive influence of our country's powerful = conservative=20 activists would be a terrible mistake. I also do not believe that an all = out ban=20 on human cloning needs to include a ban on nuclear transfer research. = The former=20 brings a new child into the world; the latter is concerned only with the = study=20 of embryonic development and curing disease. In a word, this bill would = prevent=20 vital research from taking place.=20

Ms. MAJETTE. Mr. Chairman, I would like to take = this=20 opportunity to explain why I am voting against the Human Cloning = Prohibition Act=20 today.=20

I call to mind a previous case that I think closely = resembles today's actions by this body. I refer to a trial that took = place=20 almost 40 years ago; the heresy trial of Galileo in 1633.=20

Galileo was a scientist who studied the mysteries = of the=20 physical world--he dared to explore that which we did not understand.=20 Unfortunately, the political leaders at the time were afraid, and = justifiably=20 so. They said that his ideas threatened their religious beliefs, they = were=20 afraid of where the research would lead. They were right to be = afraid--they were=20 wrong to take the actions they did as a result.=20

Galileo's persecutors concluded that his research = was=20 immoral, and after his heresy trial he spent the rest of his life under = house=20 arrest. It was not until 1992 that the church lifted its edict of = inquisition=20 against him.=20

Galileo himself saw no conflict between science and = religion. When asked about his research, he said that ``Holy Scripture = and=20 Nature are both emanation from the divine word: the former dictated by = the Holy=20 Spirit, the latter the observant executrix of God's commands.' And he = died a=20 devout Catholic.=20

Like the Roman Catholic Church in Galileo's time, I = am=20 scared. I am afraid of where cloning research may lead. I am afraid of = its=20 applicability in the wrong hands. But I refuse to be a part of a heresy = trial=20 today.=20

This bill would make it a crime for scientists to = pursue=20 reasonable research, inspired by noble goals and performed by decent = people.=20

Supporters of this misinformed bill argue that this = research should not be pursued. One of the reasons they gave is that = there is no=20 evidence that the research will work as intended. I submit that that is = exactly=20 why it should be pursued. After all, that is the point of research--to = try to=20 understand those things which we do not yet understand.=20

I believe that we have some of the greatest minds = of our=20 time trying to find cures for the dozens of diseases that plague = us--young and=20 sold, rich and poor alike. I am unwilling to take away any of their = tools out of=20 fear.=20

I am unwilling to persecute Galileo. My faith in = God is=20 strong and, perhaps, just as Galileo's research is not described by = religious=20 scholars as ``opening up new windows upon the wonders of God's = creation,'' this=20 research may one day be universally acclaimed--both for its ability to = cure=20 diseases as well as the insight it lends us to God's creation.=20

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Chairman, I believe = that human=20 cloning is dangerous, unethical and needs to be prohibited. The recent = reports=20 surrounding Clonaid's supposed first successful human baby cloning, = though thus=20 far unverified, provides further impetus for the need to enact a = prohibition of=20 this practice. As such, I strongly support banning the practice of = reproductive=20 cloning, which is the replication of an individual's genetic material in = a new=20 individual.=20

However, as strong as my opposition is to the = process of=20 reproductive cloning, my support for continued stem cell research to = develop=20 cures for debilitating diseases such as cancer, diabetes, and others, is = equally=20 strong. The process of therapeutic cloning, also known as somatic cell = nuclear=20 transfer, is the transplantation of a patient's own DNA into an = unfertilized egg=20 in order to grow stem cells. Therapeutic cloning does not in any way = lead to the=20 creation of viable human life. However, it does allow for continued = research in=20 the area of stem cells.=20

Unfortunately as a result of overly broad cloning=20 prohibition language in H.R. 534, the scientific process of therapeutic = cloning=20 is also prohibited along with reproductive cloning. Also, as my = colleague Mr.=20 CONYERS has recently pointed out, H.R. 534 also bans the = importation of=20 lifesaving medicines from other countries if their production is in = anyway=20 derived from nuclear transfer. Because of these considerations, I will = be voting=20 against H.R. 534.=20

I do, however, strongly support the substitute = measure=20 being offered by Mr. GREENWOOD, Mr. DEUTSCH, Ms. = DEGETTE,=20 Mr. ESHOO, and Mr. KIRK. This measure also bans the = process of=20 reproductive cloning, but allows continued stem cell research, which has = shown=20 great promise towards finding cures for many illnesses such as = Parkinson's=20 disease, juvenile diabetes, Alzheimer's, spinal cord injuries, blindness = and=20 sickle cell anemia.=20

Forty Nobel Laureates, millions of patients, former = first-lady Nancy Reagan who's husband, as we all know, suffers from = Alzheimer's=20 disease, and others, have expressed support for therapeutic cloning. I = urge my=20 colleagues to join me in support of the Greenwood substitute and in = support of=20 banning the unethical process of human cloning, but at the same time = allowing=20 further research into a promising field that could benefit millions of = men,=20 women, and children who suffer from devastating diseases.=20

Mr. SHAYS. Mr. Chairman, in our rush to ban human=20 reproductive cloning, we are at risk of also banning the most promising = and=20 exciting area of biomedical research in the past thirty years. If passed = into=20 law, the overly-broad Human Cloning Prohibition Act would ban not only = human=20 cloning but also a laboratory technique that may enable scientists to = understand=20 the genetic causes of diseases such as cancer and develop therapies for = diseases=20 and disabilities such as diabetes, Parkinson's Disease, and spinal cord=20 injuries.=20

No responsible person, patient advocate or = scientist=20 supports the cloning of human beings. Human reproductive cloning is = unethical,=20 should be prohibited, and should be punishable under federal law.=20

But in banning human cloning, we should not ban a=20 laboratory technique called somatic cell nuclear transfer, which can be = used to=20 derive human embryonic stem cells. With such stem cells, our scientists = will=20 gain fundamental insights into cell biology that will lead to new = treatments and=20 cures for a host of diseases and disabilities.=20

Prohibiting this basic scientific technique will = severely=20 hinder U.S. research. Our scientists have achieved an unparalleled = record of=20 accomplishment by employing new technologies to benefit humankind. New=20 innovations in scientific discovery have historically been = controversial, but=20 they have proven to save lives and help manage devastating diseases. An = example=20 is the use of recombinant DNA technology, which provoked considerable = alarm and=20 debate in the 1970's, and has since become the foundation of modern = biomedical=20 research and our biotechnology industry.=20

In his speech memorializing the crew of the space = shuttle=20 Columbia, President Bush said. ``This cause of exploration and=20 discovery is not an option we choose; it is a desire written in the = human heart.=20 We are that part of creation which seeks to understand all creation.''=20

Mr. Chairman, we should be encouraging our = scientists to=20 respond to that desire which is written in their hearts: understanding = and=20 ending the suffering of their fellow human beings. I urge my colleagues = to vote=20 in favor of the substitute offered by Mr. GREENWOOD and, if it = fails,=20 against the underlying bill.=20

Mr. PITTS. Mr. Chairman, on Thursday, February 27, = the=20 House will take up the Weldon-Stupak Human Cloning Prohibition Act (H.R. = 534), a=20 bill to prohibit the creation of human embryos by cloning.=20

This is the same bill that the House debated on = July 31,=20 2001. On that occasion, our colleague Mr. GREENWOOD offered a = substitute=20 amendment that would have permitted the human cloning (the cloning of = human=20 embryos), but attempted to prohibit initiating a pregnancy by implanting = such a=20 cloned human embryo in a womb. The House decisively rejected the = Greenwood=20 Substitute, and then adopted the Weldon-Stupak bill overwhelmingly, = 265-162.=20 Although 64 members of the Democratic caucus voted to pass the = Weldon-Stupak=20 bill, to our disappointment, Democratic Leader GEPHARDT voted in=20 opposition.=20

However, it is noteworthy that when Mr. = GEPHARDT=20 appeared on NBC's Meet the Press less than three weeks later, on August = 19,=20 2001, he appeared to have had a change of heart. Although host Tim = Russert did=20 not ask about cloning, Mr. GEPHARDT volunteered this remarkable=20 statement: ``Obviously, we don't want cloning....... We passed a law = saying no=20 cloning and I think that's the law that we ought to follow.''=20

The only bill that had been passed pertaining to = cloning,=20 of course, was the Weldon-Stupak bill (the House had emphatically = rejected the=20 pro-cloning Greenwood Substitute). It seemed that Mr. GEPHARDT = was taking=20 credit for what the House had done, even though he had voted against it = just=20 three weeks earlier. But be that as it may, we certainly agree with Mr.=20 GEPHARDT's conclusion that the ban that the House passed (the=20 Weldon-Stupak bill) is indeed ``the law that we ought to follow.''=20

We urge you to oppose the Greenwood Substitute, = which would=20 permit what President=20

[Page: H1418]

Bush called cloned human = ``embryo farms,'' and=20 to support the Weldon-Stupak bill, the only bill that would really say = ``no=20 cloning.''=20

The complete transcript of the exchange between Mr. = Russert=20 and Mr. GEPHARDT follows.=20

[End Insert]

[Excerpt from NBC Meet The Press, August 19, 2001]

Mr. TIM RUSSERT: Let me turn to the issue of = stem=20 cell embryo research. The president decided that we should look at the = stem=20 cells that already exist, but not allow any development of any new stem = cells.=20 You disagree with him. Why?=20

Rep. RICHARD GEPHARDT (D-Mo.): I just--I = don't think=20 we know where this research is going. We don't even know how many stem = cell=20 segments are out there now. He said 60. Some of the researchers don't = even know=20 that there are 60 in place now. This is an emerging field. Look, if you = have=20 somebody in your family who has Alzheimer's, who has diabetes, who has = cancer,=20 you want to find the answers to these problems. The researchers believe = there=20 may be real answers to many of these diseases over the next years. We = shouldn't=20 limit the areas that we're going to look at. We ought to see where the = research=20 can go. Obviously, we don't want cloning. Nobody is for cloning. But we = need to=20 use the research that's out there to get the answers to these diseases. = Boy, if=20 you've got somebody in your family that's really ill, you want to know = the=20 research might find an answer.=20

Mr. RUSSERT: The public seems to support the = president overwhelmingly. Let me show you the latest USA Today poll. = Sixty=20 percent approve of the president's decision; just 34 percent disagree. = And=20 there's a simple question to be asked: When do you think life begins?=20

Rep. GEPHARDT: Well, the Supreme Court said, = after=20 the--you know, somewhere between the first and second trimester.=20

Mr. RUSSERT: But when do you think?=20

Rep. GEPHARDT: I think the Supreme Court = probably=20 had it right. And I think we ought to use the research that can be done = on stem=20 cells to find the answers to these dread diseases. You know, try . . .=20

Mr. RUSSERT: Wait, wait, wait. This is = important.=20 When you first came to Congress, you proposed a constitutional amendment = to ban=20 all abortion. And you said on the House floor, ``Life begins at = conception.''=20 You've now changed your mind?=20

Rep. GEPHARDT: I think that the thing to do = here is=20 to follow the Supreme Court. I think their decision said it very = clearly, and I=20 think that's the policy that ought to be followed. I think on this stem = cell=20 research decision, we've got to let the research go to where it can, to = find the=20 answers to these problems.=20

Mr. RUSSERT: Including using the frozen = embryos that=20 are created by in vitro fertilization clinics.=20

Rep. GEPHARDT: I think we ought to let the = research=20 find the answers to these problems.=20

Mr. RUSSERT: So you would use those?=20

Rep. GEPHARDT: We passed a law saying no = cloning and=20 I think that's the law that we ought to follow.=20

Mr. RUSSERT: But these are stem cell embryos = created=20 by in vitro fertilization clinics that are discarded if not used for = research.=20

Rep. GEPHARDT: I think we ought to let the = research=20 find the answers to these problems.=20

--

CONGRESS OF THE U.S.,=20

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,=20

Washington, DC, February 25, 2003.=20

DEAR COLLEAGUE: By now, everyone has heard = of the=20 euthanized death of ``Dolly,'' the infamous cloned sheep. She died on=20 Valentine's Day 2003 at the age of 6, half the normal life-expectancy = for a=20 sheep.=20

Alan Coleman, A Singapore-based scientist who = helped clone=20 Dolly said, ``I think it highlights more than ever the foolishness of = those who=20 want to legalize (human) ..... cloning ..... In the case of humans, it = would be=20 scandalous to go ahead given our knowledge about the long-term affects = of=20 cloning.''=20

If cloning is not safe for animals, how can it be = good for=20 humans?=20

I urge you to vote for the Weldon/Stupak ban (H.R. = 534) and=20 vote against the Greenwood substitute.=20

Cordially,=20

Joseph R. Pitts,
Member of Congress.=20

[Begin Insert]

Mr. RYUN of Kansas. Mr. Chairman, I believe that = all=20 embryonic cloning, whether therapeutic or reproductive, violates moral = and=20 rational bounds.=20

First, embryonic cloning is unproven. Not a single = case of=20 embryonic cloning in animals has resulted in successful treatment of any = disease. Furthermore, animals created through embryonic cloning have = developed=20 unnaturally and suffered numerous genetic defects.=20

Second, embryonic cloning is immoral. Every cloned = embryo=20 is capable of developing into an adult. The Greenwood amendment proposes = the=20 artificial creation of life and subsequent destruction thereof. This = cannot be=20 tolerated.=20

Finally, even in the most conservative of = estimates,=20 hundreds of millions of human eggs would be needed for human cloning. = Women,=20 especially the under-privileged, would be exploited for the sale of = their eggs.=20 We cannot allow human eggs to become a commodity.=20

We must ban all embryonic cloning. I urge my = colleagues to=20 support the resolution.=20

Mr. SOUDER. Mr. Speaker, I would like to submit the = following information from National Right-to-Life:=20

[End Insert]

Those who favor cloning human embryos are proposing = competing legislation that would allow the mass cloning of human embryos = to be=20 killed in research, but attempt to ban implanation of such an embryo in = a womb.=20 In the House, we expect that this ``clone and kill'' approach will be = advanced=20 by Rep. Jim Greenwood (R-Pa.), who offered such a proposal in 2001. In = the=20 Senate, a cloning-embryos-for-research bill has been introduced by = Senator Orrin=20 Hatch (R-Utah), Dianne Feinstein (D-Ca.), and others as S. 303.=20

PRESIDENT BUSH'S POSITION

President Bush has repeatedly called on Congress to = ban all=20 human cloning (i.e., to ban the cloning of human embryos). In remarks on = January=20 22, the President said, ``I also urge the Congress to ban all human = cloning. We=20 must not create life to destroy life. Human beings are not research = material to=20 be used in a cruel and reckless experiment.'' In his January 28 State of = the=20 Union speech, the President said, ``Because no human life should be = started or=20 ended as the object of an experiment, I ask you to set a high standard = for=20 humanity, and pass a law against all human cloning.'' In a speech on = human=20 cloning last year, President Bush warned that unless such legislation is = enacted, human ``embryo farms'' will be established in the United = States. (See=20 www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/04/print/20020410-4.html)=20

THE SITUATION IN CONGRESS

The House Judiciary Committee is scheduled to mark = up the=20 Weldon-Stupak bill (H.R. 534) on Wednesday, February 12, at 10:15 a.m., = at 2141=20 Rayburn House Office Building. Once the committee completes its work, = the full=20 House could take up the bill at any time. H.R. 534 is nearly identical = to the=20 measure that passed the House on July 31, 2001, by lopsided bipartisan = vote of=20 265-162 (roll call no. 304). When the House considered the issue on that = occasion, it decisively rejected (249-178) as substitute amendment, the=20 Greenwood-Deutsch Amendment, that would have allowed the cloning of = human=20 embryos for research (roll call no. 302).=20

The recently selected Senate Majority Leader, Bill = Frist=20 (R-Tn.), said in a January 12 interview on Fox News Sunday, ``I am = opposed to=20 any time that you create an embryo itself with the purpose being = destruction,=20 and that would include the so-called research cloning. And remember, = research,=20 cloning is just that, it's experimental. There's been no demonstrated = benefit of=20 that to date, so I don't think you ought to destroy life. . .''=20

MISCONCEPTIONS AND FACTS

Misconception: The Brownback-Landrieu/Weldon-Stupak = legislation prohibits cloning of human ``cells,'' while the = Hatch-Feinstein bill=20 would allow cloning of ``cells.''=20

Reality: The Brownback-Landrieu bill (S. 245) and = the=20 Weldon-Stupak bill (H.R. 534)-- like their predecessors in the 107th=20 Congress--explicitly allow ``the use of nuclear transfer or other = cloning=20 techniques to produce molecules, DNA, cells other than human embryos, = tissues,=20 organs, plants, or animals other than humans.'' [Sec. 2 of the bill, at = (d) in=20 H.R. 534 and at (e) in S. 245; boldface added for emphasis] Thus, the = methods=20 currently used to ``clone'' new skin, for example, or to ``clone'' DNA, = are=20 perfectly okay under the Brownback-Landrieu bill. Moreover, any cloning = method=20 that would produce stem cells without first producing and killing a = human=20 embryo--as some researchers have claimed that they eventually will be = able to=20 do--is explicitly permitted by this language. In addition, the=20 Brownback-Landrieu and Weldon-Stupak bills place no restrictions on = research of=20 any kind on human ova (``eggs'').=20

In short, the Brownback/Weldon legislation and the=20 Hatch-Feinstein legislation are alike=20

[Page: H1419]

in that they would both permit = cloning=20 involving merely eggs, cells, or tissues, but they differ on one = proground=20 issue: The Hatch-Feinstein/Greenwood proposals would allow the use of = the=20 somatic cell nuclear transfer (SCNT) process to clone human embryos, and = the=20 Brownback/Weldon legislation would forbid the use of SCNT to clone human = embryos.=20

Misconception: So-called ``therapeutic cloning'' = does not=20 involve creating human embryos.=20

To cite just one example here, a group of = scientists,=20 ethicists, and biotechnology executives advocating so-called = ``therapeutic=20 cloning'' and use of human embryos for research--Arthur Caplan of the = University=20 of Pennsylvania, Lee Silver of Princeton University, Ronald Green of = Dartmouth=20 University, and Michael West, Robert Lanza, and Jose Cibelli of Advanced = Cell=20 Technology--wrote in the December 27, 2000 issue of the Journal of the = American=20 Medical Association, ``CRNT [cell replacement through nuclear transfer, = another=20 term for ``therapeutic cloning''] requires the deliberate creation and=20 disaggregation of a human embryo.'' They also wrote, ``..... because = therapeutic=20 cloning requires the creation and disaggregation ex utero of blastocyst = stage=20 embryos, this technique raises complex ethical questions.''=20

MISCONCEPTION: The Hatch-Feinstein bill would allow = research only ``unfertilized eggs up to 14 days.''=20

REALITY: As can be confirmed by reference to any = biology=20 text or even any decent dictionary, a human ovum or ``egg'' is, by = definition, a=20 single cell. Moreover, it is a very unusual cell--a gamete cell, which = means it=20 has only 23 chromosomes. An ovum has no sex.=20

MISCONCEPTION: The Hatch-Feinstein bill is a = compromise=20 that would accomplish what almost everyone agrees on, banning = ``reproductive=20 cloning.''=20

REALITY: Far from representing ``common ground,'' = the=20 Hatch-Feinstein bill represents a policy disfavored by most Americans = and=20 strongly opposed by the Bush Administration. It will not become law. But = that=20 does not bother many of its backers, such as the biotechnology industry = lobby,=20 because the primary purpose of the Hatch-Feinstein bill is to impede = enactment=20 of the real ban on human cloning, by providing political cover for = lawmakers who=20 favor allowing the creation of human embryos for research.=20

Notwithstanding the marketing efforts of the = biotechnology=20 industry lobby and its allies, the policy the Hatch-Feinstein bill or = the=20 Greenwood amendment would enact a policy that is far from a consensus=20 position--indeed, a policy that the substantial majority of Americans = oppose. A=20 Gallup poll in May 2002 found that 61% of the American people opposed = ``cloning=20 of human embryos for use in medical research'' (34% approved), which is=20 precisely what the Hatch-Feinstein bill is crafted to allow and indeed=20 encourage. In other polls, substantially higher numbers are opposed when = it=20 explained that the human embryos will die in the research.=20

The ``clone and kill'' approach has already been=20 emphatically rejected by the Bush Administration and by the House of=20 Representatives (in 2001). Secretary of Health and Human Services Tommy = Thompson=20 last year sent a letter to Senator Brownback warning that such a bill = would face=20 a presidential veto. Thompson wrote, ``The President does not believe = that=20 `reproductive' and `research cloning should be treated differently, = given that=20 they both require the creation, exploitation, and destruction of human = embryos=20 ..... the Administration could not support any measure that purported to = ban=20 `reproductive' cloning while authorizing research cloning, and I would = recommend=20 to the President that he veto such a bill.'' (See www.nrlc.org/Killing=20 XEmbryos/ThompsontoBrownback.pdf)=20

The Hatch-Feinstein bill would give federal law = enforcement=20 agencies responsibility for trying to enforce a ban on implanting a = cloned=20 embryo in a womb--an approach that the Justice Department in 2002 = rejected as=20 unworkable. The Department explained that once large numbers of cloned = human=20 embryos are created, there is no practical way to prevent some of them = from=20 being implanted in wombs, and no remedy to apply after that occurs. The=20 testimony is posted here: www.nrlc.org/killing Xembryos/Justice XDept = Xon=20 Xcloning.pdf=20

MISCONCEPTION: The Hatch-Feinstein bill would ``ban = human=20 cloning'' or ``ban the closing of human beings.''=20

REALITY: The Hatch-Feinstein bill does not ban = ``human=20 cloning.'' It bans implanting a cloned human embryo ``into a uterus or = the=20 functional equivalent of a uterus'' (the latter term is not defined), an = act to=20 which criminal penalties are attached. It also attempts to impose a rule = against=20 allowing a cloned human embryo (a so-called ``unfertilized blastocyst'') = to=20 develop past 14 days of age (Not counting time frozen). Violations of = this=20 ``14-day rule'' are subject to a civil fine of up to $250,000, and there = is=20 nothing in the bill to prevent the threat of such a fine from being = applied even=20 against a woman who carries an unborn cloned human in utero, perhaps in = an=20 attempt to compel her to procure an abortion.=20

In other words, the bill bans not ``human = cloning,'' but=20 the survival of human clones, which is a very different thing.=20

It appears that President Bush is among those who = recognize=20 cloned human embryos as human beings: in his January 22 statement, the = President=20 said, ``I also urge the Congress to ban all human cloning. We must not = create=20 life to destroy life. Human beings are not research material to = be used=20 in a cruel and reckless experiment.'' [emphasis added]=20

[Page: H1420]

human being would even be the = correct term for=20 such an individual heretofore unknown in nature.''=20

MISCONCEPTION: Those who favor cloning for research = would=20 never allow clones to develop past two weeks of age.=20

REALITY: While the Hatch-Feinstein bill purports to = establish a two-week ``deadline'' for killing human clones, there are=20 substantial reasons to doubt that the biotechnology industry would = support such=20 a limitation in a bill it actually expected to become law. Already, some = policymakers are opening the door to ``fetus farming'' with human = clones.=20

[Begin Insert]

Mr. VITTER. Mr. Chairman, every once in a = while, an=20 issue comes along that makes so much sense and has so much support, it = clearly=20 must be good public policy. The issue before us today, a full and = complete ban=20 on cloning, is just such an issue.=20

The American people overwhelmingly support banning = cloning,=20 a majority of this House has voted in the past to fully ban cloning, the = Administration supports this ban, and importantly scientists and doctors = and=20 other medical professionals support this ban on cloning.=20

So what's the hold up?=20

A lot has been and will be said about ``research = cloning''=20 or ``therapeutic cloning''--but despite all of the semantics and = wordplay the=20 other side uses, the reality remains that this procedure is one that = simply=20 horrifies most Americans. The repercussions if we do not act today are = grave.=20

Whate we're debating here is the value of human = life, pure=20 and simple. If you want to reduce human life to merely clinical terms, = research=20 elements and other antiseptic talk, then you can vote that way today. = But if you=20 are as horrified I am, as the American people are, and the medical = community is,=20 by the ghastly possibilities that cloning offers us, then you should = support=20 this legislation and a complete, full, and real ban on cloning.=20

I comment the gentlemen from Florida (DAVE = WELDON)=20 and Michigan (STUPAK) for their work, and strongly encourage all = of my=20 colleagues to support the passage of this important bill.=20

Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, these words are from = Frederic=20 Bastiat's The Law. They are prophetic, not only in the way they describe = legislators' attempts to transform society through socialized economic = planning,=20 but also in the analogy to the current moral issue before us today: = human=20 cloning.=20

Human life begins at conception. This fact is not a = matter=20 of faith. Every contemporary textbook of human embryology teaches that = the life=20 of the new individual human being begins at fertilization. When an = embryo is=20 cloned, a distinct human being is created: if implanted into a woman's = uterus,=20 he or she grows into a human being. Those who deny the humanity of the=20 ``embryo'' simply deny the facts.=20

Today we see another instance of the legislator = playing=20 God, viewing himself as Bastiat's farmer or chemist. But human embryos = are not=20 just some ``seeds'' for the ``farmers'' to scatter! I ask those of you = wishing=20 to use taxpayer dollars to fund human cloning: Were you not once at this = very=20 stage of life? Is not each of you a developed embryo? And to those who = view=20 cloning and the accompanying destruction of humans at the embryonic = stage of=20 life as morally acceptable, I ask this, Are you aware that it took 277 = attempts=20 to clone Dolly the sheep, and when she finally was born, she was = defective and=20 died soon after? We must shudder to think of what this kind of = experimentation=20 implies for humans. Many ignore that a human is not cloned by simply = waving a=20 magic wand--rather, embryos are experimented upon and then discarded = before a=20 human is created via cloning. Many pro-lifers mistakenly attack the act = of=20 cloning, when what they should address is the discarding of humans at = the=20 embryonic stage of development that precedes the act of cloning.=20

Today we have before us a bill that attempts to = protect=20 innocent human life from legislators wishing to exploit it. Though well=20 intentioned, Congress does not have authority under the Constitution to = create a=20 federal law banning cloning and the accompanying destruction of human = life. The=20 separation and enumeration of powers reserves to the states and local=20 governments the power to write and enforce laws that protect life. If = this bill=20 instead were introduced as a constitutional amendment banning the = destruction=20 and discarding of human embryos, it would both accomplish its purpose = and,=20 equally important, hold to the letter of the law.=20

In Congress we can either pass an unconstitutional = ban on=20 cloning, or we can abide by the law and not pass the ban, as bureaucrats = continue to have control over human cloning and use of taxpayer funds to = destroy=20 human life. These bureaucrats seem to have no difficulty violating the=20 consciences of those who recognize cloning experimentation for what it = is. What=20 is to be done? I fear the answer to this question, and its implications, = will=20 continue to haunt us in the months and years to come, whether or not = this=20 federal ban on human cloning passes. Mr. Speaker, when we last = considered this=20 issue I placed the following statement in the RECORD and wish to = do so=20 once again.=20

[End Insert]

Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, today we're being asked to = choose=20 between two options dealing with the controversies surrounding cloning = and stem=20 cell research. As an obstetrician gynecologist with 30 years of = experience with=20 strong pro-life convictions I find this debate regarding stem cell = research and=20 human cloning offtrack, dangerous, and missing some very important = points. This=20 debate is one of the most profound ethical issues of all times. It has = moral,=20 religious, legal, and ethical overtones. However, this debate is as must = about=20 process as it is the problem we are trying to solve.=20

This dilemma demonstrates so clearly why difficult = problems=20 like this are made much more complex when we accept the notion that a = powerful=20 centralized state should provide the solution, while assuming it can be = done=20 precisely and without offending either side, which is a virtual = impossibility.=20

Centralized governments' solutions inevitably = compound the=20 problem we're trying to solve. The solution is always found to be = offensive to=20 those on the losing side of the debate. It requires that the loser = contribute=20 through tax payments to implement the particular program and ignores the = unintended consequences that arise. Mistakes are nationalized when we = depend on=20 Presidential orders or a new federal law. The assumption that either one = is=20 capable of quickly resolving complex issues is unfounded. We are now = obsessed=20 with finding a quick fix for this difficult problem.=20

Since federal funding has already been used to = promote much=20 of the research that has inspired cloning technology, no one can be sure = that=20 voluntary funds would have been spent in the same manner. There are many = shortcomings of cloning and I predict there are more to come. Private = funds may=20 well have flowed much more slowly into this research than when the=20 government/taxpayer does the funding. The notion that one person, i.e., = the=20 President, by issuing a President order can instantly stop or start = major=20 research is frightening. Likewise, the U.S. Congress is no more likely = to do the=20 right thing than the President by rushing to pass a new federal law. = Political=20 wisdom in dealing with highly charged and emotional issues is not likely = to be=20 found.=20

The idea that the taxpayer must fund controversial=20 decisions, whether it be stem cell research, or performing abortion = overseas, I=20 find repugnant. The original concept of the republic was much more = suited to=20 sort out the pros and cons of such a difficult issue. It did so with the = issue=20 of capital punishment. It did so, until 1973, with the issue of = abortion. As=20 with many other issues it has done the same but now unfortunately, most=20 difficult problems are nationalized.=20

Decentralized decision making and privatized = funding would=20 have gone a long way in preventing the highly charged emotional debate = going on=20 today regarding cloning and stem cell research.=20

There is danger in a blanket national prohibition = of some=20 questionable research in an effort to protect what is perceived as = legitimate=20 research. Too often there are unintended consequences. National = legalization of=20 cloning and financing discredits life and insults those who are forced = to pay.=20 Even a national law prohibiting cloning legitimizes national approach = that can=20 later be used to undermine this original intent. This national approach = rules=20 out states from passing any meaningful legislation and regulation on = these=20 issues.=20

There are some medical questions not yet resolved = and=20 careless legislation may impede legitimate research and use of fetal = tissue. For=20 instance, should a spontaneously aborted fetus, non-viable, not be used = for stem=20 cell research or organ transplant? Should a live fetus from an ectopic = pregnancy=20 removed and generally discarded not be used in research? How is a = spontaneous=20 abortion of an embryo or fetus different from an embryo conceived in a = dish?=20

Being pro-life and pro-research makes the question = profound=20 and I might say best not answered by political demagogues, executive = orders or=20 emotional hype. How do problems like this get resolved in a free society = where=20

[Page: H1421]

government power is strictly = limited and kept=20 local? Not easily, and not perfectly, but I am confident it would be = much better=20 than through centralized and arbitrary authority initiated by = politicians=20 responding to emotional arguments. For a free society to function, the = moral=20 standards of the people are crucial. Personal morality, local laws, and = medical=20 ethics should prevail in dealing with a subject such as this. This law, = the=20 government, the bureaucrats, the politicians can't make the people more = moral in=20 making these judgments.=20

Laws inevitably reflect the morality or immorality = of the=20 people. The Supreme Court did not usher in the 60s revolution that = undermined=20 the respect for all human life and liberty. Instead, the people's = attitude of=20 the 60s led to the Supreme Court Roe vs. Wade ruling in 1973 and = contributed to=20 a steady erosion of personal liberty. If a centralized government is = incapable=20 of doing the right thing, what happens when the people embrace = immorality and=20 offer no voluntary ethical approach to difficult questions such as = cloning? The=20 government then takes over and predictably makes things much worse. The=20 government cannot instill morality in the people. An apathetic and = immoral=20 society inspires centralized, rigid answers while the many consequences = to come=20 are ignored. Unfortunately, once centralized government takes charge, = the real=20 victim becomes personal liberty.=20

What can be done? The first step Congress should = take is to=20 stop all funding of research for cloning and other controversial issues. = Obviously all research in a free society should be done privately, thus=20 preventing this type of problem. If this policy were to be followed, = instead of=20 less funding being available for research, there would actually be more. =

Second, the President should issue no Executive = Order=20 because under the Constitution he does not have the authority either to = promote=20 or stop any particular research nor does the Congress. And third, there = should=20 be no sacrifice of life. Local law officials are responsible for = protecting life=20 or should not participate in its destruction. We should continue the = ethical=20 debate and hope that the medical leaders would voluntarily do the = self-policing=20 that is required in a moral society. Local laws, under the Constitution, = could=20 be written and the reasonable ones could then set the standard for the = rest of=20 the nation.=20

This problem regarding cloning and stem cell = research has=20 been made much worse by the federal government involved, both by the pro = and con=20 forces in dealing with the federal government's involvement in embryonic = research. The problem may be that a moral society does not exist, rather = than a=20 lack of federal laws or federal police. We need no more federal mandates = to deal=20 with difficult issues that for the most part were made worse by previous = government mandates.=20

If the problem is that our society lacks moral = standards=20 and governments can't impose moral standards, hardly will this effort to = write=20 more laws solve this perplexing and intriguing question regarding the = cloning of=20 a human being and stem cell research. Neither option offered today = regarding=20 cloning provides a satisfactory solution. Unfortunately, the real issue = is being=20 ignored.=20

[Begin Insert]

Mr. STARK. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition = to H.R.=20 534, the Human Cloning Prohibition Act of 2003. Like most Americans, I = believe=20 reproductive cloning of human beings ought to be criminalized. I support = outlawing this practice, which is one of the provisions of this = legislation.=20 But, I cannot support this bill because it would also severely limit the = ability=20 of scientists to conduct advanced cell research and develop life-saving=20 therapies that could benefit millions of Americans.=20

H.R. 534's overly broad language would needlessly = outlaw an=20 important form of advanced cell research, known as somatic cell nuclear=20 transfer. This research holds great promise to radically improve the = health of=20 Americans. This laboratory procedure allows for the development and = harvesting=20 of embryonic stem cells that can potentially repair damaged organs and = tissues.=20 If the donor material of this procedure is from the patient, the stem = cells=20 would be genetically identical to the patient and thus avoid the problem = of=20 immune system rejection that is present with conventional treatments. = According=20 to the National Institutes of Health, this technology has ``enormous'' = medical=20 potential to treat conditions as varied as Parkinson's disease, chronic = heart=20 disease, Alzheimer's disease, diabetes and spinal injuries.=20

Unfortunately, this bill's broad language also = makes=20 illegal the importation of any therapies developed in other countries = that=20 employ this advanced cell research technology. This ban against = importation will=20 further deprive our Nation's patients of treatments that could save = their lives.=20

Support for the continuation of advanced cell = research has=20 been expressed by countless teaching and research institutions, = scientists, and=20 patient advocate groups. Opponents of this research are quick to offer = scenarios=20 of doom and gloom if we allow this research to continue. Yet, this same = group of=20 religious zealots and hapless naysayers made similar predictions with = the=20 development of such biological advances as in-vitro fertilization and=20 recombinant DNA. The only ``horrors'' that have occurred from fostering = that=20 biological research has been allowing more than 16,000 otherwise = infertile=20 couples to experience the joys of childbirth and parenthood and the = development=20 of an improved form of insulin for the treatment of diabetes.=20

While I strongly urge my colleagues to oppose H.R. = 534, I=20 also encourage support of the Greenwood/Deutsch substitute bill that = prohibits=20 the cloning of a human life, but allows for the continuation of advanced = cell=20 research and the unfettered availability of health-improving products = and=20 procedures derived from this research.=20

Mr. DEFAZIO. Mr. Speaker, today we are = having a=20 virtually identical debate over the virtually identical bill we had in = the 107th=20 Congress. Had I not been required to travel to Oregon for official=20 representational purposes, I would have voted (1) `aye' on the Scott = amendment=20 to provide for a GAO study to determine whether the prohibition on human = cloning=20 needs to be amended in the future give newer technologies; (2) `no' on = the=20 Stearns amendment forcing our moralities on other nations; (3) `aye' on = the=20 Greenwood amendment in the nature of a substitute; and (3) `no' on the=20 underlying bill, H.R. 534.=20

By bringing a bill like this to the floor, the = Republican=20 majority has transformed what could have been a rational debate over the = merits=20 and limits of emerging technologies into a dogmatic infomercial for the=20 radical-right.=20

I've consistently opposed human cloning for = reproductive=20 purposes. Under current law the federal government is prohibited from = funding=20 research that involves human cloning. In addition, the Food and Drug=20 Administration (FDA) has the authority under federal law to prohibit any = attempt=20 to clone humans for reproductive purposes and has acted to stop such = efforts. I=20 support the FDA's actions.=20

I believe H.R. 534 goes too far. This legislation = would not=20 just ban reproductive cloning, it would create harsh criminal penalties = that=20 would significantly restrict a wide range of scientific research efforts = in=20 related fields.=20

This legislation would specifically halt scientific = efforts=20 aimed at developing new treatments for those suffering from cancer, = diabetes,=20 Parkinson's disease, Alzheimer's disease, spinal cord and burn injuries. = These=20 diseases and injuries can be extremely debilitating, costly and = dehumanizing for=20 individuals, families and our society. I'm also concerned with = provisions in the=20 bill that would ban American's from receiving new treatments developed = in other=20 countries that have developed with such research.=20

If this bill is passed, we're showing the world = that our=20 drive for innovation can be derailed by senseless hysteria. Limiting = Americans=20 access to new treatments and therapies based on fear and ideology is a = backward=20 way to legislate in the twenty-first century.=20

Mr. BUYER. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of H.R. = 534, the=20 Human Cloning Prohibition Act, and I am pleased to be a cosponsor of = this=20 measure. The only difference between human cloning to produce a cloned = baby and=20 human cloning for research is whether the cloned embryo is implanted in = the=20 uterus or destroyed. The scientific procedure to create the clone is the = same.=20

H.R. 534 would prevent cloned human embryos from = being used=20 as human guinea pigs. Without this legislation, human life could be = copied,=20 manufactured in a laboratory, in a petri dish, for the sole purpose of=20 harvesting cells and then destroying the clone. The mass production of = human=20 clones solely for the purpose of human experimentation demeans us all.=20

The simple, most effective way to stop this process = is to=20 ban it, deterring its use. H.R. 534 does nothing to prohibit appropriate = scientific research. It fully permits research that clones molecules, or = DNA,=20 tissues, organs, plants, or non-human animals. So-called therapeutic = cloning has=20 not produced a single cure in animal models for any disease, nor has it = produced=20 any cures in human clinical trials.=20

In the area of human embryo cloning, the ends do = not=20 justify the means.=20

Mr. CAPUANO. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in = opposition to=20 H.R. 534, the Human Cloning Prohibition Act of 2003. This legislation = would ban=20 reproductive human cloning and prohibit nuclear transplantation to = produce stem=20 cells for medical research. I am sure that most of my colleagues here = today=20 would agree with me and every one of my constituent scientists with whom = I have=20 discussed this matter that we do not want to allow reproductive cloning. = An=20 attempt to duplicate an individual human raises profound and disturbing = moral=20 and bioethical questions. It is unacceptable for anyone in the public or = private=20 sector to attempt to create a person using somatic cell nuclear transfer = (SCNT)=20 and I believe we must prohibit it. However, Representative = WELDON's=20 proposal before us today, goes too far and also bans SCNT for = therapeutic=20 purposes. This complete ban will close the door on promising publicly = and=20 privately funded research in regenerative medicine and will end hope for = more=20 millions of Americans suffering from life-threatening diseases.=20

[Page: H1422]

The Human Cloning Prohibition Act criminalizes the = very=20 biomedical research that could help researchers find cures for = Alzheimer's=20 disease, Parkinson's disease, cystic fibrosis, various cancers, strokes = and=20 spinal cord injuries. Furthermore, H.R. 534 will halt vital research in = my=20 congressional district, throughout Massachusetts and the Nation. A ban = or a=20 moratorium on this research will result in other countries taking the = lead in=20 finding cures to these diseases.=20

Our colleague from Pennsylvania, Representative=20 GREENWOOD, has worked to produce what I believe to be a = well-balanced,=20 comprehensive alternative. The Greenwood substitute contains the same = language=20 that Rep. WELDON's legislation uses to ban reproductive cloning. = Both ban=20 scientists from using technology to produce human beings. Unlike the = Weldon=20 proposal, the Greenwood alternative allows strictly regulated, privately = funded=20 SCNT research to move forward. This legislation requires scientists to = register=20 with the federal government before conducting medical research and = requires all=20 research to be conducted with substantial oversight. The bill would also = permit=20 a stem cell technique that offers significant promise of delivering new=20 treatments and cures to millions of Americans.=20

I believe a ban on human cloning does not need to = include a=20 ban on nuclear transfer research. The National Academies and more than = 40 Noble=20 laureates agree that this research has the potential to produce = promising=20 contributions to science and medicine. I urge my colleagues to allow = this=20 research to continue, vote no on Weldon and yes on Greenwood.=20

Mrs. JONES of Ohio. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in=20 opposition to H.R. 534. Although I am against Human Cloning this bill = does more=20 than ban Human Cloning. It prevents the highest form of medical research = in our=20 society, therapeutic cloning. We owe it to our communities to explore = the=20 options of therapeutic cloning. Those who have lost relatives due to = heart=20 disease, brain damage due to strokes, Parkinson's, Alzheimer's, Cancer = ..... we=20 owe it to these people to at least explore the option of therapeutic = cloning. I=20 don't want to stop medical progress and the possibilities that it would = allow=20 for new treatments to diseases where medical progress is continuously = being=20 made. Doctors understand that these diseases cause damage to cells and = tissues=20 and that therapeutic cloning would allow them to explore the option of = replacing=20 these dead cells or tissues. I do not support human cloning for organ=20 production. I am saying lets leave ourselves options for the future. = Doctors are=20 trying to find medically safe and reliable ways to help people with = disease. I=20 have some of the greatest doctors (at Cleveland Clinic, University = Hospital), in=20 the world in, my district working with molecules and DNA to find cures = for=20 diseases, and this would limit their abilities to continue to do what it = is that=20 they do best. Save lives.=20

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Chairman, ninety percent of = all=20 Americans oppose cloning human beings. And for good reason. The American = public=20 recognizes that cloning raises serious ethical questions. Scientists = have cloned=20 monkeys, cattle, pigs, mice and other animals. Because of this success, = there=20 are a growing number of groups who claim they can, and will, clone a = human=20 being. That prospect should worry us. Cloning is a manufacturing = process--a=20 scientific assembly line--devoid of procreation. Efforts to improve = humanity=20 should never spin out of control and devalue humanity, which is = precisely what=20 human cloning does.=20

Our values of faith and family are slowly eroding. = Given=20 that fact, we should be mindful that there are certain ethical lines we = should=20 never cross. One of the dehumanizing effects of the cloning process is = the=20 failure rate. It is extremely high. Those in favor of cloning humans = often=20 downplay that it took 277 stillborn, miscarried or dead sheep to make = one Dolly.=20 And what happens to those who survive? Attempts to clone human beings = could=20 carry massive risks of producing unhealthy, abnormal, and malformed = children.=20

I favor a total ban on human cloning because if we = allow=20 cloning for any reason, we will be unable to control what is done with = cloned=20 embryos. No one is going to monitor every research laboratory. I urge my = colleagues to support this bill.=20

Ms. LEE. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong = opposition to=20 H.R. 534. This bill's title claims that it is designed to prohibit human = cloning. The reality is it will do much more: it will stifle crucial = medical=20 research that might someday cure diseases such as Parkinson's, diabetes, = or=20 Alzheimer's. None of us support human cloning. We all see such a step as = ethically reckless and medically unsound. The cloning and creation of = human=20 beings should be banned. But this bill goes much further. It bans the = practice=20 of somatic cell nuclear, which creates cells, not human beings. Somatic = cell=20 nuclear transfer, or therapeutic cloning as it is also called, = represents one of=20 our most promising avenues of medical research.=20

That is why I support the bipartisan=20 Greenwood/Deutsch/Degette amendment that would outlaw human cloning for=20 reproduction without outlawing medical advancements. This bipartisan = alternative=20 provides severe penalties, including $10 million fines, for violations = of the=20 human cloning ban but allows cell transfer technology to proceed. = Through the=20 creation of stem cells, we may be able to conquer spinal paralysis, heal = burn=20 victims, and cure a wide range of diseases. For everyone who has = helplessly=20 watched a parent succumb to the terrible cruelty of Alzheimer's or seen = a child=20 struggle with diabetes, somatic cell nuclear transfer holds out the = promise of a=20 potential cure.=20

But this bill would cut off that research and = criminalize=20 those medical advancements. The National Academies of Science examined = this=20 issue and urged lawmakers to forbid human cloning but not to outlaw = nuclear=20 transplantation which could hold the key to treating life-threatening = diseases=20 and injuries. As they complete their medical training and begin their = careers as=20 physicians, we ask our doctors to take Hippocratic Oath, which involves, = the=20 principle, ``first do no harm.'' As legislators, we should adopt a = similar=20 principle: as we wrestle with these complex scientific questions, let us = first=20 do no harm.=20

This bill applies a sledge hammer when a scalpel is = needed.=20 We can and should outlaw human cloning without wiping out the promise of = a cure=20 for millions of Americans. I urge you to oppose this bill and to support = the=20 bipartisan Greenwood/Deutsch/Degette alternative. Thank you and I yield = back the=20 balance of my time.=20

[End Insert]

The CHAIRMAN. All time for general debate has = expired.=20

Pursuant to the rule, the bill is considered as = read for=20 amendment under the 5-minute rule.=20

The text of H.R. 534 is as follows:=20

H.R. 534=20

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of=20 Representatives of the United States of America in Congress = assembled,=20

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the ``Human Cloning = Prohibition=20 Act of 2003''.

SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON HUMAN CLONING.

(a) IN GENERAL.--Title 18, United States = Code, is=20 amended by inserting after chapter 15, the following:

``CHAPTER 16--HUMAN CLONING

``Sec.=20

``301. Definitions.

``302. Prohibition on human cloning.``=A7301. = Definitions=20

``In this chapter:=20

``(1) HUMAN CLONING.--The term `human = cloning'=20 means human asexual reproduction, accomplished by introducing nuclear = material=20 from one or more human somatic cells into a fertilized or unfertilized = oocyte=20 whose nuclear material has been removed or inactivated so as to produce = a living=20 organism (at any stage of development) that is genetically virtually = identical=20 to an existing or previously existing human organism.

``(2) ASEXUAL REPRODUCTION.--The term = `asexual=20 reproduction' means reproduction not initiated by the union of oocyte = and sperm.

``(3) SOMATIC CELL.--The term `somatic = cell' means=20 a diploid cell (having a complete set of chromosomes) obtained or = derived from a=20 living or deceased human body at any stage of development.``=A7302. = Prohibition on=20 human cloning=20

``(a) IN GENERAL.--It shall be unlawful for = any=20 person or entity, public or private, in or affecting interstate = commerce,=20 knowingly--=20

``(1) to perform or attempt to perform human = cloning;

``(2) to participate in an attempt to perform = human=20 cloning; or

``(3) to ship or receive for any purpose an embryo = produced by human cloning or any product derived from such embryo.

``(b) IMPORTATION.--It shall be unlawful = for any=20 person or entity, public or private, knowingly to import for any purpose = an=20 embryo produced by human cloning or any product derived from such = embryo.

``(c) PENALTIES.--

``(1) CRIMINAL PENALTY.--Any person or = entity that=20 violates this section shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not = more=20 than 10 years, or both.

``(2) CIVIL PENALTY.--Any person or entity = that=20 violates any provision of this section shall be subject to, in the case = of a=20 violation that involves the derivation of a pecuniary gain, a civil = penalty of=20 not less than $1,000,000 and not more than an amount equal to the amount = of the=20 gross gain multiplied by 2, if that amount is greater than $1,000,000.

``(d) SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH.--Nothing in this = section=20 restricts areas of scientific research not specifically prohibited by = this=20 section, including research in the use of nuclear transfer or other = cloning=20 techniques to produce molecules, DNA, cells other than human embryos, = tissues,=20 organs, plants, or animals other than humans.''.

(b) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.--The table of = chapters for=20 part I of title 18, United States Code, is amended by inserting after = the item=20 relating to chapter 15 the following:

=20

``16. Human Cloning

=20

301''.

The CHAIRMAN. No amendment to the bill shall be in = order=20 except those printed in House Report 108-21. Each amendment may be = offered only=20 in the order printed in the report, may be offered only by a Member = designated=20 in the report, shall be considered as read, debatable for the time = specified in=20 the report, equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an = opponent, and=20 shall not be subject to amendment.=20

It is now in order to consider amendment No. 1 = printed in=20 House Report 108-21.=20

AMENDMENT NO. 1 OFFERED BY MR. SCOTT OF VIRGINIA=20

Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I offer an = amendment.=20

The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the = amendment.=20

The text of the amendment is as follows:=20

Amendment No. 1 offered by Mr. Scott of = Virginia:=20

Add at the end of the bill the following:

SEC. 3. STUDY BY THE GENERAL ACCOUNTING = OFFICE.

(a) IN GENERAL.--The General Accounting = Office=20 shall conduct a study to assess the need (if any) for amendment of the=20 prohibition on human cloning, as defined in section 301 of title 18, = United=20 States Code, as added by this Act, which study should include--

(1) a discussion of new developments in medical = technology=20 concerning human cloning and somatic cell nuclear transfer, the need (if = any)=20 for somatic cell nuclear transfer to produce medical advances, current = public=20 attitudes and prevailing ethical views concerning the use of somatic = cell=20 nuclear transfer, and potential legal implications of research in = somatic cell=20 nuclear transfer; and

(2) a review of any technological developments = that may=20 require that technical changes be made to section 2 of this Act.

(b) REPORT.--The General Accounting Office = shall=20 transmit to the Congress, within 2 years after the date of enactment of = this=20 Act, a report containing the findings and conclusions of its study, = together=20 with recommendations for any legislation or administrative actions which = in=20 considers appropriate.

The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 105, the = gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Scott) and a Member opposed each = will=20 control 5 minutes.=20

MODIFICATION TO AMENDMENT NO. 1 OFFERED BY MR. = SCOTT OF=20 VIRGINIA

Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, at the = suggestion of=20 the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Wu), I ask unanimous consent to = modify=20 the amendment.=20

The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will report the = modification.=20

The Clerk read as follows:=20

Modification to amendment No. 1 offered by Mr.=20 Scott of Virginia:=20

In the proposed subsection 3(a), insert ``after=20 consultation with the National Academy of Sciences'' after ``office''.=20

The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of = the=20 gentleman from Virginia?=20

There was no objection.=20

The CHAIRMAN. The Chair recognizes the gentleman = from=20 Virginia (Mr. Scott).=20

(Mr. SCOTT of Virginia asked and was given = permission to revise and extend his remarks.)=20

Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself = such=20 time as I may consume.=20

Mr. Chairman, this provides a GAO study of the = issue.=20

[Begin Insert]

This amendment is being presented jointly with Rep. = Wu.=20

We all agree that the cloning technology we are = aware of=20 today should not be used for human reproductive purposes. Yet, we all = know that=20 the nuclear cell transfer process that this bill bans in this country = will=20 continue in other countries in order that the promising developments in=20 stem-cell research can continue. It is possible that this process can = develop to=20 the point that it could be used to prevent or cure many dreaded = childhood or=20 adult-onset diseases such as Parkinson's disease, Alzheimer's disease, = diabetes,=20 cancer, heart disease, spinal cord injury, multiple sclerosis, severe = burns, or=20 other diseases, disorders, or conditions.=20

These developments are proceeding at a very rapid = pace.=20 This amendment would ensure that Congress is informed of developments in = the=20 technology and their potential for medical advances. It would advise us = of any=20 need for technical changes to the bill which would keep its prohibition = on=20 reproductive cloning effective and narrowly drawn, while allowing any = beneficial=20 uses of the technology consistent with the prohibition.=20

Furthermore, this is an area where public attitudes = and=20 ethical views are often confused and uncertain, and a GAO study would be = helpful=20 in summarizing and clarifying them before Congress chooses to revisit = this=20 issue. I urge my colleagues to support the amendment.=20

[End Insert]

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman = yield?=20

Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. I yield to the gentleman = from=20 Wisconsin.=20

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I thank the = gentleman for=20 yielding.=20

Mr. Chairman, I believe this is a constructive = addition to=20 the bill, I am prepared to support it, and urge that the Members adopt = it. I=20 thank the gentleman.=20

The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment, as=20 modified, offered by the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Scott).=20

The amendment, as modified, was agreed to.=20

The CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to consider = amendment No.=20 2 printed in House Report 101-21.=20

No Member being present to offer amendment No. 2, = it is now=20 in order to consider amendment No. 3 in the nature of a substitute = printed in=20 House Report 108-21.=20

AMENDMENT NO. 3 IN THE NATURE OF A SUBSTITUTE = OFFERED BY=20 MR. GREENWOOD=20

Mr. GREENWOOD. Mr. Chairman, I offer amendment No. = 3 in the=20 nature of a substitute.=20

The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate amendment = No. 3 in=20 the nature of a substitute.=20

The Clerk read as follows:=20

Amendment No. 3 in the nature of a substitute = offered by=20 Mr. Greenwood:=20

Strike all after the enacting clause and insert = the=20 following:

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the ``Cloning Prohibition = Act of=20 2003''.

SEC. 2. PROHIBITION AGAINST HUMAN CLONING.

(a) IN GENERAL.--The Federal Food, Drug, = and=20 Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 301 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the = following:

``CHAPTER X--HUMAN CLONING=20

``PROHIBITION AGAINST HUMAN CLONING

``SEC. 1001. (a) NUCLEAR TRANSFER=20 TECHNOLOGY.--

``(1) IN GENERAL.--It shall be unlawful for = any=20 person--

``(A) to use or attempt to use human somatic cell = nuclear=20 transfer technology, or the product of such technology, to initiate a = pregnancy=20 or with the intent to initiate a pregnancy; or

``(B) to ship, mail, transport, or receive the = product of=20 such technology knowing that the product is intended to be used to = initiate a=20 pregnancy.

``(2) DEFINITION.--For purposes of this = section,=20 the term `human somatic cell nuclear transfer technology' means = transferring the=20 nuclear material of a human somatic cell into an egg cell from which the = nuclear=20 material has been removed or rendered inert.

``(b) RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.--This section = may not=20 be construed as applying to any of the following:

``(1) The use of somatic cell nuclear transfer = technology=20 to clone molecules, DNA, cells, or tissues.

``(2) The use of mitochondrial, cytoplasmic, or = gene=20 therapy.

``(3) The use of in vitro fertilization, the=20 administration of fertility-enhancing drugs, or the use of other medical = procedures (excluding those using human somatic cell nuclear transfer or = the=20 product thereof) to assist a woman in becoming or remaining pregnant.

``(4) The use of somatic cell nuclear transfer = technology=20 to clone or otherwise create animals other than humans.

``(5) Any other activity (including biomedical,=20 microbiological, or agricultural research or practices) not expressly = prohibited=20 in subsection (a).

``(c) REGISTRATION.--

``(1) IN GENERAL.--Each individual who = intends to=20 perform human somatic cell nuclear transfer technology shall, prior to = first=20 performing such technology, register with the Secretary his or her name = and=20 place of business (except that, in the case of an individual who = performed such=20 technology before the date of the enactment of the Cloning Prohibition = Act of=20 2003, the individual shall so register not later than 60 days after such = date).=20 The Secretary may by regulation require that the registration provide = additional=20 information regarding the identity and business locations of the = individual, and=20 information on the training and experience of the individual regarding = the=20 performance of such technology.

``(2) ATTESTATION BY RESEARCHER.--A = registration=20 under paragraph (1) shall include a statement, signed by the individual=20 submitting the registration, declaring that the individual is aware of = the=20 prohibitions described in subsection (a) and will not engage in any = violation of=20 such subsection.

``(3) CONFIDENTIALITY.--Information = provided in a=20 registration under paragraph (1) shall not be disclosed to the public by = the=20 Secretary except to the extent that--

``(A) the individual submitting the registration = has in=20 writing authorized the disclosure; or

``(B) the disclosure does not identify such = individual or=20 any place of business of the individual.

``(d) APPLICABILITY OF HUMAN SUBJECT PROTECTION = STANDARDS.--=20

[Page: H1424]

``(1) IN GENERAL.--Research involving human = somatic=20 cell nuclear transfer technology shall be conducted in accordance with = parts 50=20 and 56 of title 21, Code of Federal Regulations, subject to paragraph = (2).=20 Individuals whose cells are used for such research shall be considered = human=20 subjects for purposes of such parts.

``(2) INFORMED CONSENT.--

``(A) DONOR OF HUMAN CELLS.--In research = involving=20 human somatic cell nuclear transfer technology, human cells may be used = only if,=20 in addition to requirements that apply under parts 50 and 56 of title = 21, Code=20 of Federal Regulations, the individual who provides the cells makes a = statement=20 in writing, which is signed by the individual, declaring that--

``(i) the individual donates the cells for = purposes of=20 such research;

``(ii) the individual understands that Federal law = regulates such technology and establishes a crime relating to the use of = the=20 technology to initiate a pregnancy; and

``(iii) the individual does not intend for the = cells to be=20 used to initiate a pregnancy.

``(B) ATTESTATION BY RESEARCHERS.--In = research=20 involving human somatic cell nuclear transfer technology, human cells = may be=20 used only if, in addition to requirements that apply under parts 50 and = 56 of=20 title 21, Code of Federal Regulations, the individual with the principal = responsibility for conducting the research makes a statement in writing, = which=20 is signed by the individual, declaring that the consent of the donor of = the=20 cells for the cells to be used in such research was obtained in = accordance with=20 this subsection.

``(e) PREEMPTION OF STATE LAW.--This = section=20 supersedes any State or local law that--

``(1) establishes prohibitions, requirements, or=20 authorizations regarding human somatic cell nuclear transfer technology = that are=20 different than, or in addition to, those established in subsection (a) = or (c);=20 or

``(2) with respect to humans, prohibits or = restricts=20 research regarding or practices constituting--

``(A) somatic cell nuclear transfer;

``(B) mitochondrial or cytoplasmic therapy; or

``(C) the cloning of molecules, DNA, cells, = tissues, or=20 organs;

except that this subsection does not apply to any = State or=20 local law that was in effect as of the day before the date of the = enactment of=20 the Cloning Prohibition Act of 2003.

``(f) RIGHT OF ACTION.--This section may = not be=20 construed as establishing any private right of action.

``(g) DEFINITION.--For purposes of this = section,=20 the term `person' includes governmental entities.

``(h) SUNSET.--This section and section = 301(hh) do=20 not apply to any activity described in subsection (a) that occurs on or = after=20 the expiration of the 10-year period beginning on the date of the = enactment of=20 the Cloning Prohibition Act of 2003.''.

(b) PROHIBITED ACTS.--

(1) IN GENERAL.--Section 301 of the Federal = Food,=20 Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 331) is amended by adding at the end = the=20 following:

``(hh) The violation of section 1001(a), or the = failure to=20 register in accordance with section 1001(c).''.

(2) CRIMINAL PENALTY.--Section 303(b) of = the=20 Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 333(b)) is amended by = adding at=20 the end the following:

``(7) Notwithstanding subsection (a), any person = who=20 violates section 301(hh) shall be imprisoned not more than 10 years or = fined in=20 accordance with title 18, United States Code, or both.''.

(3) CIVIL PENALTIES.--Section 303 of the = Federal=20 Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 333) is amended by adding at the = end the=20 following:

``(h)(1) Any person who violates section 301(hh) = or=20 section 1001(d) shall be liable to the United States for a civil penalty = in an=20 amount not to exceed the greater of--

``(A) $10,000,000; or

``(B) an amount equal to the amount of any gross = pecuniary=20 gain derived from such violation multiplied by 2.

``(2) Paragraphs (3) through (5) of subsection (g) = apply=20 with respect to a civil penalty under this subsection to the same extent = and in=20 the same manner as such paragraphs (3) through (5) apply with respect to = a civil=20 penalty under subsection (g).''.

(4) FORFEITURE.--Section 303 of the Federal = Food,=20 Drug, and Cosmetic Act, as amended by paragraph (3), is amended by = adding at the=20 end the following:

``(i) Any property, real or personal, derived from = or used=20 to commit a violation of section 301(hh), or any property traceable to = such=20 property, shall be subject to forfeiture to the United States.''.

SEC. 3. STUDY BY INSTITUTE OF MEDICINE.

(a) IN GENERAL.--The Secretary of Health = and Human=20 Services (referred to in this section as the ``Secretary'') shall = request the=20 Institute of Medicine to enter into an agreement with the Secretary = under which=20 such Institute conducts a study to--

(1) review the current state of knowledge about = the=20 biological properties of stem cells obtained from embryos, fetal = tissues, and=20 adult tissues;

(2) evaluate the current state of knowledge about=20 biological differences among stem cells obtained from embryos, fetal = tissues,=20 and adult tissues and the consequences for research and medicine; and

(3) assess what is currently known about the = ability of=20 stem cells to generate neurons, heart, kidney, blood, liver and other = tissues=20 and the potential clinical uses of these tissues.

(b) OTHER ENTITIES.--If the Institute of = Medicine=20 declines to conduct the study described in subsection (a), the Secretary = shall=20 enter into an agreement with another appropriate public or nonprofit = private=20 entity to conduct the study.

(c) REPORT.--The Secretary shall ensure = that, not=20 later than three years after the date of the enactment of this Act, the = study=20 required in subsection (a) is completed and a report describing the = findings=20 made in the study is submitted to the Committee on Energy and Commerce = in the=20 House of Representatives and the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, = and=20 Pensions in the Senate.

The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 105, the = gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Greenwood) and a Member = opposed each=20 will control 30 minutes.=20

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I rise in = opposition to=20 the amendment.=20

The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr.=20 Sensenbrenner) will be recognized to control 30 minutes.=20

The Chair recognizes the gentleman from = Pennsylvania (Mr.=20 Greenwood).=20

PARLIAMENTARY INQUIRY=20

Mr. GREENWOOD. Parliamentary inquiry, Mr. Chairman. =

The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman will state it.=20

Mr. GREENWOOD. Mr. Chairman, do I need to designate = a=20 portion of my time to the minority?=20

The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman may yield a portion of = his=20 time.=20

Mr. GREENWOOD. Mr. Chairman, I yield half of my = time to the=20 gentlewoman from Colorado (Ms. DeGette).=20

The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the gentlewoman = from=20 Colorado (Ms. DeGette) will be allowed to control 15 minutes.=20

There was no objection.=20

[Time: 15:30]

The CHAIRMAN pro tempore (Mr. Linder). The = Chair=20 recognizes the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Greenwood).=20

Mr. GREENWOOD. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such = time as I=20 may consume.=20

Mr. Chairman, it has been a good debate so far. It = was a=20 good debate last year. This is about ethical and moral issues. The = proponents of=20 the gentleman from Florida's (Mr. Weldon) bill have argued the = ethical=20 and moral issues against reproductive cloning; and on that issue, my = friend, the=20 gentleman from Florida (Dr. WELDON) and I are in perfect = agreement. It is=20 wrong to create a human being through cloning. It is probably physically = cruel=20 to do that, because of the likelihood of defect; and it is emotionally, = I=20 believe, cruel to do that because no one should be brought into life as = a=20 duplicate of another. Each of us has the right to be the product of a = mother and=20 a father. So we agree on that.=20

Now let us deal with the moral and ethical issues = that have=20 to do with somatic nuclear transfer. Because what is at stake is well = over a=20 hundred million Americans today suffering from diseases like = Parkinson's, like=20 Alzheimer's, like cancer, and like diabetes; and as this chart shows, = the=20 millions of people suffering today from those diseases and the millions = more=20 expected to be suffering from those diseases over the next 10 years.=20

Now, none of us in this room is an expert on the = science of=20 nuclear cell somatic transfer. But those who are the experts tell us = this, that=20 with this technology simply requires a limited number of eggs donated by = women,=20 denucleated, enucleated. And then the cells, the DNA from something like = a cheek=20 cell placed in that nucleus, electricity is applied and then the cells = divide.=20 Why do scientists want to do that? They want to do that because we want = to=20 observe the miraculous occurrence inside that egg as those cells become = first=20 pluripotent stem cells and then divide into specialized cells.=20

Why do they want to do that? They want to do that = because=20 they need to understand the biology and the chemistry as to how that = happens.=20 And when they have understood the biology and the chemistry of that = process,=20 there is no more need for women to donate eggs in order for the cures = for these=20 diseases to come about. Because then doctors in hospitals around the = world will=20 be able to take these patients suffering from not only these diseases = but from=20 juvenile diabetes, from Alzheimer's, from=20

[Page:=20
H1425]

spinal cord injuries, from head injuries, and take = the=20 somatic cells from that patient, combine them with the growth factors = that they=20 identify in this limited amount of research, process healthy cells from = our own=20 bodies and use those healthy cells to cure our diseases, to fix our = injuries,=20 and to reduce human suffering by amounts that we cannot even imagine.=20

So the ethical and moral issue here is are we or = are we not=20 willing to allow that science to go forward so that we go through this = transient=20 phase where we use this relatively small number of ova contributed by = willing=20 women to understand how to do this so we can bring about the cure. Now = the=20 argument that is presented by the exponents of my substitute, which = again bans=20 reproductive cloning, allows this research to continue.=20

The argument that is proposed is, well, once that = cheek=20 cell divides in an egg in a petri dish, it is a potential human being; = and,=20 therefore, if it is going to be destroyed after it divides a certain = number of=20 times, after the observations are finished that that is immoral.=20

Now, if that is the case, if that is what you = believe, then=20 we should ban in vitro fertilization because in vitro fertilization has = produced=20 100,000 embryos in this country right now that will be discarded, = 100,000 of=20 them. Far more order of magnitude than will ever be created through this = technology and they are going to be discarded, and that is apparently = okay with=20 the proponents of this legislation because it brings beautiful little = children=20 into the world to couples who otherwise could not have them.=20

So that is the trade-off we make. And nobody here = is=20 arguing, in fact, to the contrary. They are preserving the need for in = vitro=20 fertilization, and yet the number of embryos created and destroyed by in = vitro=20 fertilization orders of magnitude is more than we are talking about = here. And if=20 we want to get totally philosophical about this, every single day = millions of=20 eggs are fertilized in the womb that do not adhere to the uterine walls = and are=20 flushed away and somehow that is the way God does it. That is the way = nature=20 does it. And we do not hear a gnashing of teeth about that by the makers = of this=20 amendment about this bill.=20

Ladies and gentlemen, this is a turning point in = our=20 history. This is a question about whether or not we are going to go = forward with=20 the most promising medicine of our time. The ability to stop the = suffering, to=20 heal the sick, to cure the injured of diseases that have plagued us for=20 centuries or whether we turn our back on this science in the name of = ethics and=20 morals and kill an opportunity to do something that is ethically and = morally=20 correct, and that is to prevent this suffering.=20

Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.=20

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself = such time=20 as I may consume.=20

Mr. Chairman, the debate on whether or not human = embryos=20 should be cloned is one that goes across religious lines, it goes across = philosophical lines, and it goes across political lines; and I certainly = can=20 respect those who come down on the other side of this piece of = legislation. But=20 this amendment in the nature of a substitute is the equivalent of a = political=20 knuckle ball thrown into the debate on whether or not human embryos = should be=20 cloned.=20

In June of 1997, President Clinton's National = Bioethics=20 Advisory Committee issued its report entitled ``Cloning Human Beings.'' = I=20 referred to this in the general debate, but I want to refer to this = again=20 because this is the crux of the argument against the Greenwood = substitute. The=20 executive summary of President Clinton's blue ribbon commission states = in part:=20 ``The commission began its discussions fully recognizing that any effort = in=20 humans to transfer a somatic cell nucleus into an enucleated egg = involves the=20 creation of an embryo with the apparent potential to be implanted in = utero and=20 developed to term.''=20

The whole question around the Greenwood substitute=20 amendment is how to police the cloned human embryos once they are = created. Sure,=20 some of them may be used for purposes that the gentleman from = Pennsylvania (Mr.=20 Greenwood) described in his eloquent opening statement, but = others can=20 be implanted in utero and be developed to term. And what does the = government do=20 in that case when somebody for whatever purpose they want to announces = that they=20 have developed a cloned human being?=20

This substitute is a big mistake for a number of = reasons,=20 and it should not be supported. Most notably it would make the = prohibitions=20 against human cloning virtually impossible to enforce, as I have just = described.=20 It would foster the creation of cloned human embryos through the = Department of=20 Health and Human Services, an agency of the Federal Government; and it = would=20 trump States that wish to prohibit cloning. As I have already stated, = allowing=20 the creation of cloned embryos by law would enable anyone to attempt to = clone a=20 human being. While most individuals do not have the scientific capacity = to clone=20 human embryos, once they have been cloned, there has been no mechanism = for=20 tracking them and to determine what use those cloned human embryos are = being put=20 to. In fact, one would logically expect an organization to authorize the = cloned=20 human embryos pursuant to this substitute to be prepared to produce an = abundance=20 of cloned embryos for research. Meanwhile, those without the = capabilities to=20 clone human embryos could easily implant any one of the legally cloned = embryos=20 if they had the opportunity and a child would develop.=20

The fact is any legislative effort in order to be = effective=20 to prohibit cloning must allow enforcement to occur before the cloned = embryo is=20 implanted. Otherwise, it is too late, and that is the big deficiency of = the=20 Greenwood substitute. The substitute attempts to draw a distinction = between=20 necessary scientific research in human cloning by authorizing the = Department of=20 Health and Human Services to administer a quasi-registry, quasi because = the=20 embryos are not in the custody of HHS. They are maintained by private=20 individuals. However, let us be clear that the crux of this substitute = is to=20 invoke a debate on stem cell research. A political knuckle ball in this = debate=20 on stem cell research is a red herring.=20

Just read the bill. First, therapeutic cloning does = not=20 exist, not even for experimental tests on animals. Second, the = substitute would=20 require authorized researchers to destroy unused embryos, the first = Federal=20 mandate of its kind and a step that is extremely controversial. Third, = H.R. 534=20 within its text allows for research using stem cells. Again, the bill = does not=20 prohibit stem cell research, notwithstanding the allegations by those = who are=20 opposed to it.=20

Currently, private organizations are able to = conduct=20 unfettered research on embryonic stem cells. Further, in August 2001, = President=20 Bush announced that Federal funds could be used for research on existing = stem=20 cell lines. H.R. 534 would do nothing to hinder that research.=20

The bill would also not affect research using adult = stem=20 cells. Adult stem cells are the other area of stem cell research which = is much=20 less controversial and which has been successful in over 45 clinical = trials. In=20 fact, adult stem cells have been utilized to treat multiple sclerosis, = bone=20 marrow disorders, leukemia, anemia, and cartilage defects, and = immuno-deficiency=20 in children.=20

Adult stem cells have been extracted from bone = marrow,=20 blood, skeletal muscle, the gastrointestinal tract, the placenta, and = brain=20 tissue to form bone marrow, bone, cartilage, tendon, muscle, fat, liver, = brain,=20 nerve, blood, heart and other cells. H.R. 534 would not interfere with = this=20 work. It would not interfere with this work. But it prohibits the = production of=20 cloned embryos. It is a cloning bill, not a stem cell research bill.=20

Fourth, the substitute prohibits States from = adopting laws=20 that prohibit or more strictly regulate cloning within their borders. It = is a=20 Federal preemption. Try telling any of our constituents that they cannot = ban=20 human cloning through their State legislatures and I will tell you they = will=20 disagree.=20

Finally, Mr. Chairman, the substitute contains a = 10-year=20 sunset provision. If this were to be enacted, Congress would have to go = through=20 this debate once again before the sunset occurs. The ethical and moral=20 objections to human cloning will not change 10 years from now or 50 = years from=20 now or forever. However, the proponents of human cloning will continue = to fight=20

[Page: H1426]

for their right to produce = human clones in=20 America, and authorizing a subsequent ban on human cloning could become = even=20 more controversial.=20

That is why Members on both sides of the aisle = should rise=20 in opposition to the substitute, defeat it, and pass H.R. 534.=20

Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.=20

Mr. DEUTSCH. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the = gentlewoman from Colorado (Ms. DeGette), who has been a leader = for=20 several years on this issue.=20

Ms. DeGETTE. Mr. Chairman, in the April = 22, 2001,=20 edition of the magazine ``Science,'' researcher Irving Weissman and = Nobel=20 Laureate David Baltimore said, ``The wrong action here could close the = door to=20 an important avenue of scientific and clinical discovery.''=20

[Time: 15:45]

They were talking, of course, about the = restrictions on=20 Federal funding of stem cell research. As Ronald Reagan said, here they = go=20 again.=20

Everybody agrees that we must ban human cloning and = our=20 substitute does just that, but the difference in this bill is we allow = for the=20 very important somatic nuclear cell transfer technology which is being = developed=20 and which will be the cure for many diseases that affect millions of = people both=20 in the United States and worldwide.=20

I hear the opponent of our substitute saying, oh, = no, stem=20 cell research will not be hurt, but that could not be farther from the = truth,=20 and here is why. Stem cell research is continuing, but the base bill = will ban=20 the somatic nuclear cell transfer research that we are talking about. = What this=20 research does at this point is it takes somatic cells, so-called = therapeutic=20 cloning techniques, it replaces the nucleus, and it makes new cells of = tissues=20 that will cure diseases like Parkinson's, Alzheimer's and diabetes. This = type of=20 research is truly the clinical extension of stem cell research because = without=20 this research we will never have islet cells for diabetics. We will = never have=20 the cells for Parkinson's or Alzheimer's or nerve damage because we will = not be=20 able to match the patient's tissue.=20

We are not and we do not support creating embryos = for the=20 purpose of this research. Instead, what happens is researchers use = existing=20 embryos from reproductive clinics, which are going to be disposed of = anyway, and=20 there is no way that this research will be used to clone a human being, = period.=20 It will be a criminal act under our substitute.=20

I do not think people should demagogue this issue. = These=20 are very difficult ethical and medical issues, but unless we have some = control=20 over the research and unless we ban human cloning, we will not be able = to have=20 cures for all of these very important diseases.=20

As the co-chair of the Congressional Diabetes = Caucus, I=20 think we need to do everything we can to support this important cell = research=20 but also to have strict control. Forty Nobel Laureates agree with this. = More=20 than two thirds of Americans agree with this. Senator Orrin Hatch and = former=20 Senator Connie Mack agree with this. And here is what Nancy Reagan said = in a=20 letter dated January 29 of this year: ``There are so many diseases that = can be=20 cured, we cannot turn our back on this.''=20

Do not turn your back on all of these procedures.=20

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time = as he=20 may consume to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Weldon).=20

Mr. WELDON of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I thank the = gentleman=20 for yielding me the time, and I again want to commend him for his work = in this=20 area and his eloquent statements on the floor.=20

I rise in very strong opposition to this = substitute, and I=20 encourage all my colleagues to vote against it and to vote in favor of = the=20 underlying bill.=20

Let me address, first out, one of the issues that = seems to=20 be implied by some of the discussion that I have heard so far, and that = is,=20 these embryos that are created through somatic cell nuclear transfer = process are=20 somehow not embryos or they are cells or they are cheek cells or they = are stem=20 cells. I am a scientist, a doctor. I am not an expert in this area, but = I know a=20 fair amount about it. I did research in molecular genetics as an = undergraduate.=20 I am a physician.=20

When a person does somatic cell nuclear transfer = they are=20 creating a human embryo. Indeed, President Clinton's Bioethics Council = has said=20 that, and President Bush's Bioethics Council has said that, a human = embryo=20 resulting from the nuclear transfer process is a human embryo. It is = contrasted=20 from a human embryo created by sexual reproduction, which is a unique = embryo;=20 whereas when we create a human embryo through somatic cell nuclear = transfer, we=20 are essentially creating an identical duplicate or twin.=20

So let us do away with that issue here and now. = This is=20 very, very clearly a human embryo. That is what the gentleman from = Pennsylvania=20 wants to allow to be created for research purposes. What will happen if = we do=20 that? What will happen if we go down that route?=20

I contend that a lot of things will happen that I = think are=20 very, very concerning. Number one, we are going to have a lot of = research labs=20 that will need eggs. Where will they get the eggs? They will have to get = them=20 from women. How do we get eggs from women? Well, we give them drugs that = cause a=20 phenomenon called superovulation. We have to do periodic ultrasounds to = make=20 sure they do not develop ovarian cysts, and they can get depression from = those=20 drugs; and then once the eggs are ripe, we have to give the woman a = general=20 anesthetic to harvest the eggs. And we will have these research labs = that are=20 going to need these large quantities of eggs, and this is why these = biotech=20 executives say this is a nonstarter in terms of developing so-called = therapeutic=20 cloning. The logistics of this are just unimaginable of how we would = execute=20 something like this.=20

One important thing I want to say, if we have all = of these=20 labs generating these eggs, we are going to have unscrupulous physicians = implanting one of these in a woman, and we are going to usher in the = very thing=20 that the gentleman from Pennsylvania and the gentleman from Florida say = they are=20 against. They say they are against reproductive cloning, but our own = Justice=20 Department says there will be no way to police this. We will have all of = these=20 embryos in all of these labs, and the only way to prevent it is to stop = it from=20 the very, very beginning.=20

Might I also just reiterate, adult stem cell = research is=20 moving along very nicely. We have heard some very impassioned comments = about=20 Parkinson's disease. I want to quote from Dennis Turner, who had his = Parkinson's=20 disease treated successfully with adult stem cells. We cannot even = produce one=20 research study in a rat where we can cure Parkinson's disease with = embryo stem=20 cells or cloned stem cells. But I have got a real live human being here. = He=20 says, they were not fetal cells, they were my cells, so I would not have = to take=20 any anti-rejection medications the rest of my life. Dennis Turner = previously=20 could not even hold a newspaper, and now he is hardly on any medication = at all.=20 The adult stem cells are working great.=20

I say to my colleagues this alternative, this = substitute,=20 is unnecessary and unethical. We do not want to go down the path of = creating=20 human life for the purpose of exploiting it in the lab and then = destroying it.=20

Vote no on this substitute. Vote yes on the = underlying=20 bill.=20

The CHAIRMAN pro tempore (Mr. Linder). Is = there=20 any objection for the time yielded by the gentleman from Pennsylvania = (Mr.=20 Greenwood) to the gentlewoman from Colorado (Ms. = DeGette) to=20 be controlled on the minority side by the gentleman from Florida (Mr.=20 Deutsch)?=20

There was no objection.=20

Mr. GREENWOOD. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such = time as I=20 may consume.=20

I want to quickly make observations about two=20 contradictions that I think my friend from Florida made. Number one, he = said=20 that our substitute cannot be enforced. That does not make any sense. If = we can=20 enforce the Weldon law, we can enforce the Greenwood law, and if people = are=20 going to make clones in violation of the law, they are going to do it = under the=20 Weldon law or the Greenwood law. So that is an argument we should = discount=20 immediately.=20

The second contradiction, which I think is more = severe, is=20 that I heard the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Weldon) talk about = we are=20 going to have shelves of embryos, we are going=20

[Page: H1427]

to have embryo farms; we are = going to create=20 all of these embryos. He just told us how extraordinarily difficult it = is to get=20 one ovum. We have to superovulate a woman. It is very difficult. It is = painful.=20 Women are not going to line up to have this procedure.=20

So there is absolutely no chance whatsoever that we = are=20 going to have this huge multitude of eggs. We are going to be lucky to = have=20 enough to do the research.=20

Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman = from=20 Illinois (Mr. Kirk).=20

Mr. KIRK. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for = yielding=20 me the time, and rise in support of the Greenwood substitute because it = honors=20 our tradition of medical science.=20

Medical achievement is part of America's = birthright. In the=20 last 50 years we have won more Nobel prizes than England, Germany, = Russia,=20 France, Sweden, Canada, Denmark, Japan and Switzerland combined. Six out = of 10=20 Nobel prizes in medicine come just to America.=20

Part of our achievement is due to Congress because = we have=20 supported medical research. Republicans and Democrats joined to double=20 biomedical research at the National Institutes of Health. But part of = our=20 achievement is also because Congress did not impede research. Unlike = Iran, we=20 follow the guidance of doctors, not doctrines.=20

America's medical leadership conquered yellow = fever,=20 diptheria, cholera and smallpox and polio; and words like ``gout,'' = describing=20 excess uric acid, or ``consumption,'' describing tuberculosis, were = commonly=20 used by our grandparents but are now aliens outside our children's = vocabulary.=20

We stand on the edge of new victories. AIDS is no = longer a=20 death sentence in America, and peer-reviewed scientists predict that = Americans=20 are in their last decade of diabetes. In my district, we are building a = human=20 kidney using stem cells, an achievement that would cause the word = ``dialysis''=20 to drop from the English language.=20

Parkinson's and Alzheimer's will one day make their = last=20 stand against the tide of American research. And think of it: a world = without=20 diabetes, Parkinson's, Alzheimer's or dialysis.=20

It is our duty to honor the American tradition of = medical=20 science to hasten the day when these diseases no longer plague our = mothers and=20 fathers. In the Navy, we say, ``Lead, follow, or get out of the way.'' I = urge=20 Members to support the Greenwood substitute: Lead, follow or get out of = the way.=20

The Greenwood language continues America's = leadership.=20 Other countries will continue to follow us, and at the very least, it = gets=20 Congress out of the way of future cures.=20

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes = to the=20 gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Wu).=20

Mr. WU. Mr. Chairman, I rise to state today that I = am=20 strongly pro-choice. I am strongly pro-stem cell research, and I have = profound=20 discomfort in opposing many of my professors who oppose the = Weldon-Stupak bill=20 which I favor, and I urge support of the Weldon-Stupak bill and = reluctantly urge=20 defeat of the substitute bill.=20

I think that this is a time to pause. It is a time = which=20 behooves caution, that we take some time to let our ethics catch up with = our=20 technology. Our technology has gotten to the point where we are talking = about=20 genetic mixes, mixing of human and animal cells and other procedures = which I=20 think the public has a reasonable, profound discomfort with.=20

Many scientists say it is incredibly dangerous to = stop any=20 form of experimentation. I submit to my colleagues that we do stop = certain forms=20 of experimentation. We no longer permit the kinds of experiments on = nonhuman=20 primates which potentially could protect us in vehicle accidents. The = Nuclear=20 Test Ban Treaty is nothing but a cessation of certain forms of = experimentation,=20 and many scientists were in favor of the destruction of the last stocks = of=20 smallpox virus which would have stopped experimentation on that virus.=20

There are times, very rare, but there are times = when it=20 behooves caution to pause, to pull back, and to deeply consider. I = differ with=20 the chairman that perhaps in 5 or 10 years, science and the ethics may = lead us=20 to a different conclusion. But perhaps it leads us to the same = conclusion. We=20 should come back and force Congress to address this issue in 5 or 10 = years.=20

At this point in time, I rise to support the = Weldon-Stupak=20 bill and in opposition to the Greenwood-Deutsch substitute, and I submit = for the=20 RECORD an article from the Washington Post, April 11, 2002, on = this=20 subject.=20

Not Ready for Human Cloning=20

(By Bill Frist)

WASHINGTON POST.--Can one be an advocate for = embryonic stem cell research while opposing human cloning = experimentation?=20 That's the question facing about 30 U.S. senators who have not yet taken = a=20 position on human cloning legislation to be brought before the Senate.=20

But we must first understand the similarities and=20 distinctions between the two. It's important to understand that human=20 ``therapeutic'' or ``research'' cloning is an experimental tool often = confused=20 with, but distinct from, embryonic stem cell research. Only then can we=20 appropriately dissect a debate on the potential of the science vs. the = restraint=20 defined by ethics and moral concerns.=20

Most agree that human reproductive cloning, or the = cloning=20 of human beings, should be banned. The contentious issue is whether this = ban=20 should extend to all human cloning, including human embryo a research = cloning=20 experimentation, a brand-new field. Advocates point to its potential to = develop=20 tissues that will not be rejected by a patient's immune system. They = also argue=20 for human cloning as a source of genetically diverse stem cells for = research.=20 Moreover, they say such experimentation will further our basic = understanding of=20 biology and life's origins.=20

But regardless of our religious backgrounds, most = of us=20 remain uncomfortable with the idea of creating cloned human embryos to = be=20 destroyed in an experiment.=20

As a physician and legislator who struggles with = this=20 inherent tension between scientific progress and ethical concerns. I = focus on=20 two fundamental questions: (1) Does the scientific potential of human = research=20 cloning experimentation justify the purposeful creation of human = embryos, which=20 must be destroyed in experiments? (2) Does the promise of human = embryonic stem=20 cell research depend on experimental human research cloning?=20

At this point in the evolution of this new science, = I=20 cannot justify the purposeful creation and destruction of human embryos = in order=20 to experiment on them, especially when the promise and success of human=20 embryonic stem cell research do not depend on experimental research = cloning.=20

President Bush last August outlined a = scientifically and=20 ethically balanced policy that allows federal funding of embryonic stem = cell=20 research for nearly 80 stem cell lines. This has opened the door to a=20 significant expansion of embryonic stem cell research. Further, there = are no=20 restrictions on private research using stem cells from the thousands of = embryos=20 left over after in vitro fertilization. This research, too, is underway. = The=20 promise and hope for new cures is being investigated. And the promise of = this=20 research does not--I repeat, does not--depend on human embryo cloning.=20

Human cloning would indeed provide another source = of stem=20 cells--this time by asexual reproduction. But a human embryo still has = to be=20 created--then destroyed--to produce these stem cells. Moreover, very = little=20 research cloning experimentation has been done with animals--a = prerequisite to=20 any demands for such work in humans. Given the early state of this = uncharted new=20 science, the large number of federal cell lines and the unlimited number = available for private research, I believe a sufficient number and range = of cell=20 lines are available.=20

As a heart transplant surgeon, I know intimately = the=20 challenges of transplant rejection. But I also know of multiple = promising=20 strategies to address this issue, such as the development of ``tolerance = strategies,'' improved pharmacologic immunosuppression and the = manipulation of=20 cell surface structure to make cells ``invisible'' to the immune = system--none of=20 which carries the ethical burdens attached to human cloning.=20

No one can deny the potential that human cloning = holds for=20 increased scientific understanding. But given the serious ethical = concerns this=20 research raises, the fact that promising embryonic stem cell research = will=20 continue even under a cloning ban, the lack of significant research in = animal=20 models and the existence of promising alternatives, I am unable to find = a=20 compelling justification for allowing human cloning today.=20

The fact that we are even engaged in this debate = testifies=20 to the rapid and encouraging progress of science. For now, the proper = course is=20 to stop short of allowing cloning research in humans but to = enthusiastically=20 embrace the public and private stem cell research that holds such great = hope for=20 those who suffer from a wide range of disorders and conditions, such as=20 Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease and diabetes.=20

Mr. DEUTSCH. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the = gentlewoman from California (Ms. Eshoo), who, based upon long=20 background and interest in this area, has been a leader in terms of = health care=20 for all Americans.=20

Ms. ESHOO. Mr. Chairman, I thank my distinguished = colleague=20 for yielding me the time.=20

I rise today in support of the substitute and in = opposition=20 to the underlying bill.=20

[Page: H1428]

There are three major points that need to be made. = First,=20 the substitute bans human cloning in any form, period. It has stiff = criminal and=20 civil penalties imposed on anyone who would attempt human cloning, and = both=20 bills do that.=20

[Time: 16:00]

One is not diminished with a stronger bill. They = both=20 absolutely provide that.=20

Second, the underlying bill takes a step that I do = not=20 think can be talked about enough, and that is that it turns scientists = and=20 researchers, who I think are the merchants of hope, into criminals = simply for=20 trying to find cures for our most dreadful diseases.=20

In the life of our Nation, there have been many = times that=20 white-hot issues have been debated in the Congress. In the mid-1970s, = the=20 subject was recombinant DNA. Today, this procedure is responsible for = the=20 insulin that allows children with juvenile diabetes to live normal = lives. It was=20 such a debate like this one today that took place in the Congress, and = there=20 were Members that stood up and said we cannot do this, the sky will = fall, it is=20 not moral, it is not ethical; and yet we took the steps to move in that=20 direction.=20

In the late 1970s, and again in the early 1990s, = the=20 subject was in vitro fertilization. Many Members questioned then, in a = very=20 important debate, how we could allow that process to go forward; and yet = today=20 there are many happy families as a result of it. Today, the opposition=20 characterizes this in a very unusual way. In my view, it is the = equivalent of=20 book burning, to criminalize scientists and researchers and ban what = they do.=20

It is important to take note of how these debates = have gone=20 forward. I think the Congress needs to move forward today with = scientific=20 discovery and also affirming life and protecting it. We can do both. I=20 understand that this is a difficult issue for some Members, but I think = that we=20 need to look at who stands with us in this, the groups that support H.R. = 801. Is=20 Stanford University off its rocker? Is the American College of = Obstetricians and=20 Gynecologists totally wrong in this? Is the American Gastroenterological = Association wrong? How about the American Infertility Association, the = American=20 Medical Association, the American Society for Cell Biology, the National = Health=20 Council, the Lymphoma Research Foundation, the International Foundation = for=20 Anticancer Drugs?=20

I could go on and on. Mr. Chairman, I urge my = colleagues to=20 read the list that I will ask be placed in the RECORD and to read = it=20 carefully. Let us ban human cloning, let us support American research = and those=20 that are a part of it.=20

Mr. Chairman, the list I just referred to is = submitted=20 herewith for the RECORD.=20

Groups Supporting H.R. 801--Alliance for Aging = Research,=20 Alpha-1 Foundation, ALS Association, American Association of = Neurological,=20 Surgeons/Congress of Neurological Surgeons, American College of = Obstetricians=20 and Gynecologists, American Council on Education, American Foundation = for AIDS=20 Research (amfAR), American Gastroenterological Association, American = Infertility=20 Association, American Medical Association, American Society for Cell = Biology,=20 American Society for Microbiology, American Society for Reproductive = Medicine,=20 American Society of Hematology, Association for Women in Science, = Association of=20 American Medical Colleges, Association of American Universities, = Association of=20 Reproductive Health Professionals, Biotechnology Industry Organization,=20 California Institute of Technology, Californians for Cure, Canavan = Research=20 Illinois, Cancer Research and Prevention Foundation, Cedars-Sinai Health = System,=20 Children's Neurobiological Solutions, Christopher Reeve Paralysis = Foundation,=20 Coalition of Patient Advocates for Skin Disease Research, Columbia = University=20 Committee for the Advancement of Stem Cell Research, Cures Now, Duke = University=20 Medical Center, Elizabeth Glaser Pediatric AIDS Foundation, Genetic = Alliance,=20 Hadassah, Harvard University, Hereditary Disease Foundation, Hope for = ALS.=20

International Foundation for Anticancer Drug = Discovery=20 (IFADD), International Longevity Center--USA, International Psoriasis = Community=20 (IPC), Jeffrey Modell Foundation, Johns Hopkins Medicine, Juvenile = Diabetes=20 Research Foundation, International Lymphoma Research Foundation, Monash=20 University, National Association for Biomedical Research, National = Coalition for=20 Cancer Research, National Coalition for Cancer Survivorship, National = Council on=20 Spinal Cord Injury, National Health Council, National Venture Capital=20 Association, Parents of Infants and Children with Kernicterus, = Parkinson's=20 Action Network, Parkinson's Disease Foundation, Project A.L.S., Quest = for the=20 Cure, Research!America, Resolve: The National Infertility Association, = Rett=20 Syndrome Research Foundation, Society for Women's Health Research, = Stanford=20 University, Stem Cell Research Foundation, Steven and Michele Kirsch = Foundation,=20 Tourette's Syndrome Association, Tuberous Sclerosis Alliance, University = of=20 California System, University of Minnesota, University of Rochester = Medical=20 Center, University of Southern California, University of = Wisconsin-Madison,=20 Vanderbilt University and Medical Center, Washington University in St. = Louis,=20 WiCell Research Institution, Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation, = Wisconsin=20 Association for Biomedical Research and Education.=20

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes = to the=20 gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith).=20

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Chairman, I thank my = good=20 friend for yielding me this time.=20

Mr. Chairman, on the eve of this debate in July = 2001,=20 Washington Post columnist Charles Krauthammer referred to Mr.=20 Greenwood's legislative approach to human cloning ``a nightmare = of a=20 bill.'' He said, ``Mr. Greenwood sanctions, licenses, and = protects the=20 launching of the most ghoulish and dangerous enterprise in modern = scientific=20 history, the creation of a nascent cloned human life for the sole = purpose of its=20 exploitation and destruction.''=20

The majority of the House, like Mr. Krauthammer, = rejected=20 the Greenwood amendment by a vote of 178 to 249. We got it right then, = and I do=20 hope that Members today will vote against the Greenwood substitute. The=20 Greenwood substitute, Mr. Chairman, would, for the first time in human = history,=20 sanction the creation of human life with the demand, backed by new = Federal=20 criminal and civil sanctions, that the new life be destroyed after being = exploited.=20

For the small inconvenience of registering your = name and=20 your business address, and filling out a form, you would be licensed to = play God=20 by creating life in your own image or someone else's. You would have the = right=20 to create embryo farms or anything else science might someday allow to = be=20 created outside the womb. And in the end, only failure to kill that = which you=20 had created would be against the law. We call it, Mr. Chairman, clone = and kill.=20 Amazingly, the only new crime created by the Greenwood amendment is = failure to=20 kill all human lives created. Federal law would say, create as many as = you like,=20 so long as you eventually kill them.=20

Mr. Chairman, the clear consequence, I believe, of = the=20 Greenwood substitute is that it would not even stop the birth of a human = clone,=20 which it proposes to do with a moratorium. Because his approach would = encourage=20 the creation of cloned embryo stockpiles and cloned embryo farms, it = would make=20 the hard part of human cloning completely legal and would make the = relatively=20 easy part, implantation, illegal.=20

I strongly support the underlying bill and urge = rejection=20 of the Greenwood substitute.=20

Mr. GREENWOOD. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such = time as I=20 may consume, and ask my friend from New Jersey how we would wind up with = a=20 cloned embryo stockpile? How would that happen?=20

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Chairman, will the = gentleman=20 yield?=20

Mr. GREENWOOD. I yield to the gentleman from New = Jersey.=20

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. I would just say to my = friend, Mr.=20 Chairman, that once this process is sanctioned and encouraged legally = Federal=20 dollars or other dollars might follow, and embryos will be cloned, this, = I=20 believe over time, human embryo farms, this science, will be certainly = doable.=20 And it is doable. We know that.=20

Mr. GREENWOOD. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, = and then I=20 will yield to the gentleman again.=20

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Let me finish. You asked = me a=20 question.=20

Mr. GREENWOOD. I am reclaiming my time, and then I = will=20 yield to the gentleman again.=20

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. But over time there would = be the=20 creation of human embryo farms.=20

The CHAIRMAN pro tempore (Mr. Linder). The = gentleman from Pennsylvania controls the time.=20

Mr. GREENWOOD. Mr. Chairman, I would love to have a = dialogue with the gentleman, but let us go back and forth a little here. =

[Page: H1429]

The gentleman from New Jersey said over time we = would clone=20 eggs. Can the gentleman explain how you clone an egg? Is the gentleman=20 suggesting we can take one egg and turn it into multiple eggs?=20

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. If the gentleman will = continue to=20 yield, I said we would clone cells that would become identical to those = that=20 they were from, whether it be from you or I or anyone else. They would = become an=20 embryo capable of growing, if uninterrupted, into a young person, into = an=20 elderly person, and to a natural death.=20

Mr. GREENWOOD. Reclaiming my time once again, I am = not=20 sure, with all due respect, that my friend from New Jersey understands = this=20 process.=20

You cannot, you cannot, you cannot take one cloned = entity=20 and multiply it. You have to go back and get another egg. The gentleman = from=20 Florida (Mr. Weldon) described how extraordinarily difficult it = is to=20 get one egg. You have to find a woman who is willing to be superovulated = and=20 give up an egg to science. You cannot multiply that egg into more = embryos. You=20 can make one.=20

So, Mr. Chairman, I ask the gentleman again, can = the=20 gentleman explain the science by which he claims that we are going to = wind up=20 with, as he said, embryo stockpiles, embryo farms? Where do these = thousands of=20 eggs that the gentleman describes in this fictitious nightmare come = from?=20

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. I thank the gentleman for=20 continuing to yield, Mr. Chairman, and respond that it will happen over = time, as=20 financial inducements are provided. As some of our colleagues pointed = out=20 earlier in the debate, when money is provided, some women may be induced = to sell=20 their eggs; and many thousands, if not tens of thousands of eggs will be = produced over time. There will be a magnet provided to these women, = especially=20 the poorer women, to offer up their eggs for this kind of operation.=20

Mr. GREENWOOD. Mr. Chairman, the gentleman has = answered my=20 question, and I will reclaim my time.=20

The gentleman proposes in his response to my = question that=20 women of America are going to line up for dollars so they can be = superovulated,=20 and it is the most ridiculous and disrespectful attitude towards women I = can=20 imagine. To think that the gentleman from New Jersey believes that the = women of=20 this country are going to line up for a painful procedure, and one as = intimate=20 as the donation of eggs for money, I think, is incredible.=20

The proponents of the Weldon bill would like to = paint those=20 of us who think that this research, this transient period of research so = important for science, as somehow out of the mainstream. The gentlewoman = from=20 California talked about some of the organizations that stand with us. = Let me=20 name some others:=20

The Alliance for Aging Research, the Alpha-1 = Foundation,=20 the ALS Association, the American Association of Neurological Surgeons, = the=20 Congress of Neurological Surgeons, the American College of Obstetricians = and=20 Gynecologists, the American Foundation of AIDS Research, the American=20 Gastroenterological Association, the American Infertility Association, = the=20 American Medical Association, the American Society for Cell Biology, the = American Society for Reproductive Medicine, the American Society of = Hematology,=20 the Association of American Medical Colleges, the Cancer Research and = Prevention=20 Foundation, the Christopher Reeve Paralysis Foundation, the Children's=20 Neurobiological Solutions Organization, the Coalition of Patient = Advocates for=20 Skin Disease Research, the Genetic Alliance, Harvard University, Hope = for ALS,=20 Lymphoma Research Foundation, the National Association for Biomedical = Research,=20 the National Coalition for Cancer Research, the National Coalition for = Cancer=20 Survivorship, the National Council on Spinal Cord Injury, National = Health=20 Council, the Parents of Infants and Children with Kernicterus, = Parkinson's=20 Action Network, the Parkinson's Disease Foundation, Research America, = Tourette's=20 Syndrome Research Foundation, et cetera.=20

This is the mainstream of American medicine. This = is the=20 mainstream of American science. This is the intelligentsia of America = who=20 actually understand how this science works, who do not walk around = thinking you=20 can multiply eggs through science and who do not believe women are going = to line=20 up by the tens of thousands for dollars to produce these fictitious = embryo=20 farms.=20

My colleagues, there is a time in American history = where we=20 are either going to decide to go with the people who understand this = stuff and=20 the people who have compassion in their hearts for these people with = these=20 diseases, or we are going to fall prey to this Luddite anti-scientific = and=20 demagogical approach.=20

Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.=20

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself = such time=20 as I may consume.=20

Mr. Chairman, the gentleman from Pennsylvania is = way off=20 base, and I can tell my colleagues from my own family experience how far = off=20 base he is.=20

My mother died of Alzheimer's disease. For the last = year=20 and a half of her life, she did not know who I was, she did not know who = my wife=20 was, she did not know who my sister was, or who my kids were. And to = insinuate=20 that those of us who disagree with the gentleman's amendment are = Luddites and=20 insensitive is flat-out wrong.=20

Furthermore, my beloved wife, who I have been = married to=20 for almost 26 years, has had a spinal cord injury. She has no = sensitivity below=20 her waist. She is a wonderful woman. She has given me two wonderful = children,=20 and we have lived day by day and minute by minute with that kind of a = condition;=20 and she and I are both in favor of what the gentleman from Florida (Mr.=20 Weldon) is trying to do because there is an ethical issue and = there is=20 a moral issue involved in this, which many people want to turn their = backs on.=20 But in my family we have to live with it every day and every minute, and = we will=20 until death do us part.=20

Now, the whole issue on this amendment, to get back = to my=20 initial remarks, is the policing of what is done with the cloned embryos = that=20 the Greenwood amendment allows. 99.99 percent of the people that do the=20 experimentation on cloned embryos may do it in an entirely ethical = manner. But=20 all we need is one unethical person to implant a cloned embryo in utero = and we=20 have a cloned baby. And once that unethical person plants the cloned = embryo in=20 utero and it starts developing as a fetus, what does that gentleman's = amendment=20 do about it? Absolutely nothing. Are we going to throw somebody in jail = for=20 doing that? Are we going to throw the mother in jail for doing that? No = way. The=20 baby is going to be born, and we are going to have a cloned human being. =

Again, Bill Clinton's bioethics panel said: ``The=20 commission began its discussions fully recognizing that any effort in = humans to=20 transfer a somatic cell nucleus into an enucleated egg involves the = creation of=20 an embryo with the apparent potential to be implanted in utero and = developed to=20 term.''=20

[Time: 16:15]

Your substitute does not deal with this issue at = all. That=20 is why it is fatally flawed.=20

Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume = to the=20 gentleman from Florida (Mr. Weldon).=20

Mr. WELDON of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I thank the = gentleman=20 for yielding me this time. I want to get at this issue of eggs and how = are you=20 going to get them. The gentleman from Pennsylvania has implied that my = concerns=20 about women's donation are unfounded. Let me just underscore from the = start that=20 there are a lot of people on the left that have a lot of concern about = this=20 issue. One of the first people who came into my office to join forces = with me on=20 preparing this legislation was Judy Norsigian. She is pro-choice. She = helped=20 write the Boston Women's Health Cooperative book, ``Our Bodies, = Ourselves.''=20

Indeed, I think some of the concern about this = issue is why=20 I think seven Democrats, seven or eight Democrats with a perfect voting = record=20 with NARAL, supported my bill in the 107th Congress and it is over this = concern.=20 The gentleman from Pennsylvania implied it's ridiculous, women aren't = going to=20 be lining up. The issue is essentially this. If you are going to start = doing a=20 lot of this experimentation, you are going to need a lot of eggs because = not=20 every egg you put the nucleus in and then zap it with electricity begins = to=20 divide and form an embryo. There is a fairly high failure rate if you=20

[Page: H1430]

actually read the research = articles, which I=20 have done. There is a pretty high failure rate. So you are going to need = lots of=20 eggs to create a few embryos and you are going to need a lot of women to = get a=20 lot of eggs.=20

And who will donate their eggs? Well, it is going = to be=20 women who will do it for money. It is a painful procedure. Women do this = right=20 now. The fertility clinics frequently deal with women who are older and = their=20 eggs are not very viable and so they pay typically coeds to donate some = of their=20 eggs so that some of these older women can actually have a baby. It is = already=20 going on today. But it is going on today on a very limited level and it = is going=20 on today for what I think is an ethically and morally appropriate = purpose:=20 somebody wants to have a baby, somebody struggling with infertility. But = now we=20 are going to be talking about creating these eggs for this research.=20

The research, Mr. Chairman, is going nowhere. I = have read=20 the reports. It is not going to ever lead to any cures. The reason the = biotech=20 industry wants the Greenwood amendment to prevail and does not want my = position=20 to prevail is because they want to create human models of disease so = that we can=20 get away from using rats and mice as our models for disease. To me, this = is a=20 huge issue. You are talking about creating human embryos, modifying them = genetically to preprogram them with diseases, and then selling them for = a profit=20 by the biotech industry.=20

I said before, it is an abomination. If you do not = think=20 that is an abomination, I do not know what you think is. To me it is = absolutely=20 ghastly.=20

Let me just close by again saying all of this = research can=20 proceed with animal models unfettered under the provisions of the bill = that the=20 chairman has brought to the floor. You can continue with animal = research. You=20 can clone DNA. You can clone animals. You can clone cells. You just = cannot=20 create a human embryo under the provision of this legislation. I think = it is the=20 right thing to do. I think that morally it is the correct thing to do. I = would=20 again encourage all of my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this substitute = and vote=20 ``yes'' on the underlying bill.=20

I want to commend the gentleman from Wisconsin for = his very=20 eloquent remarks.=20

Mr. DEUTSCH. Mr. Chairman, may I inquire how much = time each=20 of us has remaining?=20

The CHAIRMAN pro tempore (Mr. Simpson). = The=20 gentleman from Florida (Mr. Deutsch) has 9 minutes remaining. = The=20 gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner) has 5 minutes = remaining.=20 The gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Greenwood) has 30 seconds=20 remaining.=20

Mr. DEUTSCH. Mr. Chairman, I know, at least at this = table,=20 we have literally probably about 10 or 12 or 15 Members who would like = to speak.=20 I would at least ask for unanimous consent to offer each side an = additional 10=20 minutes.=20

The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Is there objection to the = request=20 of the gentleman from Florida?=20

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, reserving the = right to=20 object, there is a snowstorm bearing down on this city. There are = numerous=20 Members who have asked me to speed this debate up so that they can get = out of=20 town and not be marooned here. I would ask the gentleman from Florida to = have=20 compassion on those Members and withdraw his unanimous consent request. = If he=20 persists, I am constrained to object.=20

The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Objection is heard.=20

Mr. DEUTSCH. Mr. Chairman, I hear the possibility = of=20 objection so I withdraw it at this point in time.=20

Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman = from=20 California (Mr. Schiff), an original cosponsor of the = legislation who=20 is very knowledgeable about this issue.=20

Mr. SCHIFF. I thank the gentleman for yielding me = this=20 time.=20

Mr. Chairman, I would like to address my remarks to = some of=20 the arguments that have been made by the opposition to the substitute: = first,=20 that other research will adequately substitute for somatic cell nuclear=20 transfer; second, the policing issue; and third, the moral issue.=20

On the first issue, there is no adequate substitute = for the=20 science of somatic cell nuclear transfer. Adult stem cells do not have = the same=20 potential to differentiate. And even if you are talking about embryonic = stem=20 cells, the advantage of the somatic cell nuclear transfer is that the = transfer=20 will bear the DNA of the patient who is being treated and it will not be = rejected by the patient. That is a vital distinction, because it will = not=20 necessitate the use of immunosuppressant drugs. So there is no adequate=20 substitute for this type of research.=20

On the second point, that we cannot adequately = police this=20 if we allow this. As a practical matter and speaking as a former = prosecutor, if=20 we want to preclude any possibility of abuse, we not only need to = preclude any=20 kind of stem cell research, we need to ban and close down every = fertility clinic=20 in the country. When has it been the case that because of the = possibility of=20 abuse or criminality we would shut down important, vital avenues of = research?=20 That has never been the policy of the United States. It is one of the = reasons we=20 lead the world in research and one of the reasons we have to continue to = lead.=20

Finally, on the most difficult question, and that = is the=20 moral question, the question of when life begins. This is not a question = that we=20 can resolve on the House floor. It is something we all bring our faiths = to bear=20 on. But what we can decide is whether we are willing to use the coercive = power=20 of the government to make that decision for everyone else; whether we = are=20 willing to use that coercive power to say that we will deny people = treatment=20 derived from this important science because some of us have a view of = life that=20 life begins with the fertilization of an egg or with a somatic cell = nuclear=20 transfer when others do not. I would urge my colleagues to deny = themselves the=20 benefit of that research if they choose, but do not deny it to the rest = of the=20 world.=20

Mr. DEUTSCH. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the=20 gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Price).=20

(Mr. PRICE of North Carolina asked and was = given=20 permission to revise and extend his remarks.)=20

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, since = the House=20 last considered a ban on cloning, the National Academy of Sciences and = the=20 President's Council on Bioethics have both issued reports on the ethical = and=20 social questions raised by cloning. H.R. 534 does not reflect the=20 recommendations of either body.=20

In moving to head off the morally unacceptable = practice of=20 cloning human beings, the National Academy of Sciences concluded that we = must=20 take great care not to limit the process of somatic cell nuclear = transfer which=20 holds considerable potential for developing new therapies and advancing=20 biomedical knowledge.=20

The 17 members of the President's Council on = Bioethics were=20 divided on a final policy recommendation, but even the most conservative = members=20 of the council recommended only a 4-year moratorium on therapeutic = cloning, not=20 an outright ban as the Weldon bill would mandate.=20

There is a compelling moral case for therapeutic = cloning=20 based on our obligation to relieve human suffering and to affirm human = health=20 and life. The Greenwood substitute maintains the critical scientific and = moral=20 distinction between reproductive cloning, which we all agree should be = banned,=20 and therapeutic cloning which has tremendous potential for human = benefit.=20

Vote against H.R. 534 and for the Greenwood = substitute.=20

Mr. DEUTSCH. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the=20 gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Moran).=20

Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I rise in very = strong=20 support for this substitute amendment. Embryonic stem cell use is = necessary in=20 discovering the causes of a myriad of genetic diseases, to testing new = drug=20 therapies more efficiently on laboratory tissue instead of human = volunteers, and=20 to staving off the ravages of disease with the regeneration of our = bodies'=20 essential organs.=20

Contrary to what opponents have been saying, this=20 substitute does not give a green light to individuals and companies who = perform=20 human somatic cell nuclear transfer. It requires them to register with = the Food=20 and Drug Administration which will act as an independent oversight = committee.=20 The Greenwood substitute formalizes in law what is already being = practiced=20 across this Nation.=20

If the underlying bill instead of the substitute = passes, it=20 will represent a=20

[Page: H1431]

triumph for ideological special = interests over=20 the public interest, because the public interest is best served when the = medical=20 and the scientific community is free to exercise their professional = judgment in=20 extending and enhancing human life.=20

Mr. DEUTSCH. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the=20 gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Davis).=20

(Mrs. DAVIS of California asked and was = given=20 permission to revise and extend her remarks.)=20

Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Chairman, I rise in = support=20 of the Greenwood substitute. We know that the people who have come = before us=20 today have said, and they have said this very clearly, that none of us = supports=20 cloning as a means of human reproduction. But we also know that drug = discoveries=20 often have narrow targets. I believe that my colleague, the gentleman = from=20 Pennsylvania (Mr. Greenwood), mentioned the number of = organizations=20 that are supporting this. Those who suffer from unusual illnesses that = kill the=20 young seldom have sufficient numbers to stimulate drug research; but it = is this=20 basic research we are talking about, this basic research into cell = reproduction=20 that, if successful, could benefit large numbers of such diseases, each = of which=20 affects a small number of people.=20

None of us here would want to look a constituent in = the eye=20 and say that we rejected the possibility of pursuing 21st century = science which=20 might have saved the life of their loved one.=20

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes = to the=20 gentlewoman from Tennessee (Mrs. Blackburn).=20

Mrs. BLACKBURN. I thank the gentleman for yielding = me this=20 time.=20

Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the good doctor = from=20 Florida's legislation, H.R. 534, and against the Greenwood substitute. I = also=20 want to thank my chairman on the Committee on the Judiciary for moving = the=20 legislation through our committee and bringing it here today.=20

I am very concerned by the language of the = substitute and=20 its ramifications. Leon Kass, the distinguished bioethicist, notes that = under=20 the Greenwood language, embryo production is explicitly licensed and = treated=20 like drug manufacturing. Furthermore, it would establish an unworkable = system of=20 embryos in labs all over the country and puts Federal law enforcement in = charge=20 of making sure that no egg is ever implanted in a woman's body. Our law=20 enforcement officials simply cannot carry out the directive.=20

The language of the base bill is narrowly tailored. = Simply,=20 the language ensures that women are not exploited so their eggs cannot = be mass=20 harvested as commodities for research purposes. And the language = prohibits the=20 creation of cloned human embryos for experimental research or productive = purposes. I urge my colleagues to oppose the substitute and to support = this=20 important legislation.=20

Mr. DEUTSCH. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the=20 gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Ruppersberger), one of our new = Members.=20

Mr. RUPPERSBERGER. Mr. Chairman, I am not in favor = of=20 cloning humans for reproduction but I do favor the medical research that = the=20 Greenwood substitute would provide. Every day in this country hundreds = of=20 thousands of Americans suffer from the effects of degenerative disease = and=20 spinal cord injuries. As a young attorney I was in a car accident where = I nearly=20 lost my life. Maryland's Emergency Medical Shock Trauma system saved my = life.=20 Medical research saved my life. To this day I continue to serve as vice = chair of=20 the Shock Trauma Board. My work with shock trauma has put me in contact = with a=20 number of people who are suffering from degenerative diseases and spinal = cord=20 injuries.=20

My good friend Burt Greenwood from Baltimore has = Lou=20 Gehrig's disease. Every day he fights to stay with us. Every day he = hopes that=20 stem cell research someday will give him a chance. That is why I stand = in=20 support of the Greenwood amendment. We must make continued research a = reality=20 and not just a hope for the families that we represent.=20

Let me quote Dr. Jeffrey Rothstein, a professor of=20 neurology and the director for ALS research at Johns Hopkins University: =

No responsible scientist wants to clone a human.=20 Responsible scientists want to continue the research for cures to = degenerative=20 disease. Stem cell research holds the only hope for thousands of = suffering=20 Americans.=20

[Time: 16:30]

Mr. DEUTSCH. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the=20 gentleman from Kansas (Mr. Moore).=20

Mr. MOORE. Mr. Chairman, this debate is not about = human=20 cloning, and everybody in this Chamber knows that. In fact, both bills = ban human=20 cloning. This debate is about whether there is going to be medical = research that=20 may provide answers to some of the horrible diseases that afflict = people. I want=20 my colleagues to meet little Claire, 3 1/2 , and Lauren, 5. They have a = disease=20 called SMA, spinal muscular atrophy. It is a genetic disease. Half the = kids=20 diagnosed with this die by the time they are 2 years old. All they want = is a=20 chance. They have hope. H.R. 534 takes the chance for a cure away from = them. I=20 hope that the people on the side of H.R. 534 will think about that. All = they=20 want is a chance. Is that too much to ask?=20

Please, I implore my colleagues here to vote for = the=20 Greenwood substitute and against H.R. 534.=20

Mr. DEUTSCH. Mr. Chairman, I yield 30 seconds to = the=20 gentlewoman from Oregon (Ms. Hooley).=20

Ms. HOOLEY of Oregon. Mr. Chairman, I thank the = gentleman=20 from Florida (Mr. Deutsch) for yielding me this time.=20

Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of the = Greenwood=20 substitute and in opposition to H.R. 534. I join with my colleagues in = making=20 one thing perfectly clear: I am opposed to cloning of humans. I do not = believe=20 there is any justification in replication of a human being. However, I = believe=20 that we in Congress have a responsibility to carefully craft Federal = legislation=20 on cloning that will not outlaw legitimate medical research that may = save or=20 enhance the lives of many.=20

Former First Lady Nancy Reagan has stated her = support of=20 therapeutic cloning because it offers the best hope for curing = Alzheimer's. I am=20 supporting the amendment. I urge my colleagues to do the same.=20

Mr. DEUTSCH. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time = as I=20 may consume.=20

Mr. Chairman, I am going to read a letter that = Nancy Reagan=20 wrote to this Congress on this issue. ``As you may know, Ronnie will = observe his=20 92nd birthday soon. In earlier times we would have been able to = celebrate that=20 day with great joy and wonderful memories of our life together. Now, = while I can=20 draw strength from these memories, I do it alone, as Ronnie struggles in = a world=20 unknown to me or the scientists who devote their lives to Alzheimer's = research.=20 Because of this, I am determined to do what I can to save other families = from=20 this pain. I'm writing, therefore, to offer my support for stem cell = research=20 and to tell you I'm in favor of new legislation to allow the ethical use = of=20 therapeutic cloning. Like you, I support a complete ban on reproductive = cloning.=20 However, I believe that embryonic stem cell research, under appropriate=20 guidelines, may provide our scientists with many answers that are now = beyond our=20 grasp. Sincerely, Nancy Reagan.''=20

Mr. Chairman, there are those families that might = not=20 choose to want to use this research, and my colleagues mentioned, = themselves,=20 that they would not. This bill actually bans the importation of those = cures. I=20 doubt there is a family in America that if Alzheimer's was cured through = this=20 research in Ireland, Japan, Germany that they would not use it; and I = would not=20 ask a Member personally to state what would happen on the floor if that = was the=20 case, but I ask them to look into their own hearts before they vote = about that.=20

Finally, I would say that that is the issue in = front of us=20 today. I urge the support of the substitute and adoption of the final = bill.=20

Mr. GREENWOOD. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such = time as I=20 may consume.=20

It has been a good debate. The gentleman from = Wisconsin=20 seemed to think that I was impugning the opponents of my substitute. I = am not.=20 My point was that contrary to the argument that the gentleman from New = Jersey=20 (Mr. Smith) made that the purpose of this research is strictly = for the=20 exploitation and destruction of human life is wrong, this is about hope. = This is=20 about trying to stop suffering, and we=20

[Page: H1432]

have a choice to make here = between fear and=20 hope, and I encourage my colleagues to support hope. Support the=20 Greenwood-Deutsch amendment and vote ``no'' on the Weldon bill.=20

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I yield the = balance of my=20 time to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Weldon), the author of = the=20 bill.=20

Mr. WELDON of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I again thank = the=20 chairman for his work in this area, and I thank him for yielding me this = time.=20

The Greenwood substitute purports to be a ban on = human=20 cloning. It is a moratorium on human cloning. It is a 10-year = prohibition that=20 sunsets; and it allows unfettered, essentially, the creation of human = embryos in=20 the lab for the purpose of research; and then it requires their = destruction,=20 essentially, through a process called somatic cell nuclear transfer or = human=20 cloning.=20

We have never gone in this direction before where = we are=20 actually talking about creating human embryos in the lab for exploiting = them and=20 destroying them. There have been a few labs in different places in the = country=20 that have tried to do this. One successfully. There are fertility = clinics that=20 have so-called excess embryos, and some of them have made those embryos=20 available for stem cell research. This bill does not affect that. That = would be=20 permissible to move forward.=20

The question before us is, is the Greenwood = substitute a=20 real ban on human cloning? I contend it is not. It would still allow the = creation of clones in the lab in embryonic form, and I believe very = strongly=20 that it will usher in what the supporters of the substitute claim that = they do=20 not want to see and that is reproductive cloning, because we will have = all of=20 these labs generating these embryos and eventually one of them or more = will find=20 its way into unscrupulous hands, will be implanted, and will result in=20 reproductive cloning.=20

Might I also add that there are some people who = want to=20 allow this research to move forward so that they can some day be able to = do=20 reproductive cloning. At a hearing we had on this issue, I had Dr. Brian = Cohen=20 testify before the committee, and he repeatedly said, ``We are opposed = to=20 reproductive cloning at this time.'' He kept saying ``at this time.'' = And I=20 finally asked him, ``What do you mean by 'at this time'?'' And he is the = executive director, or the president, of the American Society for = Reproductive=20 Medicine; and then he went on to basically say that if they can work = through all=20 of the problems with cloning that they would some day like to be able to = do it.=20 And what will happen, what will be next with that? I contend that the = age of=20 eugenics will have arrived. There will be people who will then want to=20 manipulate these embryos for the purpose of creating a human with = preintended=20 specifications, specifying size, height, weight, athletic performance,=20 intellectual capabilities; and it will open a Pandora's box of frightful = potentialities that I feel that we as a civilization do not want to open = up, and=20 therefore I strongly encourage my colleagues on both sides of the aisle = to vote=20 against the substitute and vote ``yes'' on the underlying bill.=20

[Begin Insert]

Mr. EVANS. Mr. Chairman, I have come before you = today to=20 share my strong opposition to H.R. 534 and to ask my colleagues to vote = for the=20 Greenwood substitute. It is very important to me personally that we take = a=20 serious look at the issue of banning technology for the inherently = different=20 uses of creating embryos for both therapeutic cloning and reproduction = cloning.=20

First, this issue does not conflict with religious = faith.=20 One leading scientist provides this description of cloning technology: = ``Because=20 there are no body cells of any kind, and the cells have not yet = individualized=20 they are not a person yet, by definition. Saying that a preimplantation = embryo=20 is a human being and arguing that therapeutic cloning is, therefore, = unethical=20 is simply not based on fact.''=20

Therapeutic cloning and stem cell research have the = potential to bring us exciting new treatments and possible cures for = many of our=20 most debilitating diseases and injuries including Parkinson's, diabetes, = heart=20 disease, multiple sclerosis, burns, and spinal cord injuries. The list = goes on.=20 The number of Americans suffering from these afflictions--and indeed the = number=20 of those who will potentially reap the benefits--is estimated to be over = 100=20 million. Mr. Speaker, and as someone with Parkinson's Disease, I am one = of those=20 millions.=20

Critics of therapeutic cloning and embryonic stem = cell=20 research say that there has been little progress and these techniques = offer only=20 pipe dreams to those who are sick or dying. I ask my colleagues why this = fledgling science which is in its infancy should be banned before = further=20 developments and progress can be made.=20

Opponents to therapeutic cloning say that the = possible=20 evils associated with creating cloned human beings are so great that we = need to=20 ban the technology itself, that is a slippery slope. This is simply not = the=20 case, and the Greenwood substitute institutes severe criminal penalties = for=20 anyone involved in implanting a cloned embryo in a women's uterus.=20

In fact, the only slippery slope in this = debate--the fate=20 of embryos, which may be applied then to embryos created for in vitro=20 fertilization, that are created with a possibility of being discarded is = at=20 stake. As a society, we have accepted and even embraced the science of = in vitro=20 fertilization. Deciding that we should more to a society in which = embryos should=20 never be created with the knowledge that they would be discarded would = not only=20 affect the importance research of embryonic stem cells but also affect = the=20 millions of Americans who gain hope of bearing their own children by in = virto=20 fertilization.=20

Regeneration medicine provides hope for millions of = Americans. It is the future of medicine for so many of our citizens who = suffer=20 every day. It holds hope for my life. Let us leave science and medical=20 technology to our medical technology to our medical researchers and use = our time=20 to focus on this Nation's real problems. I urge my colleagues to vote = for the=20 Greenwood substitute, H.R. 801, and vote against H.R.534.=20

Mr. KIND. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong = opposition=20 to H.R. 534 and in strong support for the = Greenwood/Deutsch/DeGette/Eshoo/Kirk=20 substitute. The United States has long been the leader in medical = research and=20 biotechnology. Biotechnological advances have the potential to transform = the way=20 we treat many debilitating diseases.=20

One promising way that biotechnology is changing = our lives=20 is through the potential of stem cell research and therapeutic cloning.=20 Therapeutic cloning is not cloning in the sense most people use the = term, namely=20 using technology to create a person who is a genetically identical copy = of=20 someone else. That type of cloning is reproductive cloning and is = rightfully=20 subject to a ban. The Greenwood Substitute would do just that.=20

In addition, the Greenwood Substitute would also = permit=20 therapeutic cloning. The potential therapies that may be developed from=20 therapeutic cloning are significant. Therapeutic cloning will help = researchers=20 pursue stem cell therapies that could impact the lives of millions of = Americans=20 suffering from many of our most devastating illnesses, including = Alzheimer's=20 disease, Parkinson's disease, ALS, heart disease, cancer, and spinal = cord=20 injury. Further, this technology offers hope to the more than 1 million = American=20 children who suffer from juvenile diabetes because of the potential to = turn=20 these cells into insulin-producing cells.=20

We have entered the 21st Century and are on the = verge of=20 breakthrough biomedical discoveries that could save millions of lives. = H.R. 534=20 would halt vital research that has the potential to revolutionize the = biotech=20 industry. Stopping this research in its tracks puts the United States at = a clear=20 and immediate disadvantage. Other nations such as Britain, France, = Sweden, and=20 the Netherlands, all of which currently have laws allowing therapeutic = cloning=20 from designated sources, continue to advance the technology. Molecular = and=20 cellular biologists committed to this research have already begun to = look=20 abroad, and they take with them lucrative investments from the biotech = industry.=20 Other scientists have dropped the cause all together, wasting precious = time in=20 the development of life-saving procedures that will someday help = millions of=20 people.=20

Back home in Wisconsin, I have had the privilege of = meeting=20 with Dr. James Thomson, a developmental biologist at the University of=20 Wisconsin-Madison, who has contributed greatly to stem cell research. = Three=20 years ago he became the first person to isolate stem cells from human = embryos.=20 He has not taken on this work lightly, he has thought carefully about = the=20 ethical implications of his research. For Dr. Thompson, the moral = questions=20 about embryo experimentation were not difficult to resolve; he concluded = that=20 research was the ``better ethical choice.''=20

Because embryonic stem cells have the potential to = grow=20 into any cell or tissue in the human body, scientists say they hold = great=20 potential for repairing damaged tissues or organs. But to extract them = requires=20 that the embryo be destroyed, therefore, every year since 1995, Congress = has=20 attached language to its appropriations legislation to ban taxpayer = financing of=20 the work.=20

This ban requires that Dr. Thomson work into = different=20 laboratories, one of them in secret. He works primarily out of the = university's=20 primate center. This is his federally financed laboratory where he = studies stem=20 cells derived from the embryos of rhesus monkeys and marmosets.=20

[Page: H1433]

When he conducts research on human cells, he must, = however,=20 move to an entirely different laboratory. This one is paid for by WiCell = Research Institute, a corporation set up as a subsidiary of the = Wisconsin Alumni=20 Research Foundation, the nonprofit group that holds the patent to Dr. = Thomson's=20 work. The location of this lab has never been disclosed to ensure the = safety of=20 the workers.=20

Freedom of research has led to the development of = over 117=20 biotech products that have helped more than 250 million people = worldwide. In=20 addition, the biotech industry generated $28.5 billion in revenues in = 2001, an=20 increase of more than 350 percent in just ten years. Further, employment = within=20 the sector more than doubled in the same time period.=20

The United States has an obligation to demonstrate = our=20 continued leadership in this arena and we can only do so with the = support of our=20 government. We cannot afford the loss of resources that a chilled = scientific=20 climate will bring. We should not cede our leadership, or our industry, = to other=20 nations.=20

I urge my colleagues to vote no on the Weldon bill. = Support=20 responsible research, vote yes on the Greenwood Substitute.=20

Mrs. CHRISTENSEN. Mr. Chairman, the issue of = human=20 cloning is one that understandably causes grave concern and often heated = opposition. But we in our position as leaders have the responsibility = not only=20 to ensure that this developing and promising technology that can = revolutionize=20 the art of healing, is not used for nefarious purposes, but to also = educate and=20 inform the public on the issue.=20

Today I rise in support of H.R. 801, the = Greenwood-Deutsch=20 Cloning Prohibition Act of 2003, because it makes the critical = distinctions and=20 provides the hope that the people of this country are looking for. We = don't ever=20 want to clone human beings, but we do want to use the technology termed, = ``human=20 somatic cell transfer'' as the vital tool it is, to allow scientists to = fully=20 develop the wonderful promise of stem cell research.=20

I applaud my colleagues for their leadership in = bringing=20 this alternative bill forward. It should be the primary, and really the = one bill=20 before us today.=20

As a physician I look forward to the day when we = can cure=20 diseases such as sickle cell disease, make the quadriplegic walk again, = and=20 successfully treat or reverse so many other diseases for which this was = still an=20 impossible dream I was in practice.=20

To pass H.R. 534 would not only cost our nation its = standing as the world leader in health technology, but passing that base = bill=20 would kill this dream, and with it the hope of life and health for = countless of=20 our constituents.=20

Let's not do that, vote instead for the=20 Greenwood/Deutsch/DeGette/Eschoo substitute.=20

Mrs. McCARTHY of New York. Mr. Chairman, I rise = today to=20 express my extreme opposition to the cloning of human beings. At no time = do I=20 think it will be acceptable for science to go down that path. As Members = of=20 Congress, we need to impose very strict penalties to prevent scientists = from=20 making the jump from doing important research to playing God.=20

But as a nurse, I remember a debate very similar to = this=20 one, the debate over researching DNA. In the 1970s, we in the healthcare = community were very excited over the research being conducted by = scientists on=20 human beings actual biological makeup. However, many others believed = then that=20 we were headed towards creating Frankenstein or Aldolphus Huxley's = ``Brave New=20 World.''=20

The DNA technology debate also focused on = regenerative=20 medicine based on stem cell and nuclear transfer biology. DNA involves = splicing=20 the gene for a desired protein into bacterial, yeast or other mammalian = cells,=20 which then manufacture protein. To accomplish this, scientists had to = develop=20 incredibly powerful techniques for managing the mechanisms to cellular = biology.=20 Society had to decide whether to allow their continued development and = if so,=20 how to regulate and manage these techniques.=20

Mr. Chairman, the research continued, and millions = of=20 patients and their families have benefited. Today, it is used to produce = human=20 therapeutic proteins to treat or prevent a wider array of diseases and=20 conditions. DNA products include: Human Insulin for diabetics; Herceptin = for=20 patients with breast cancer; Epogen for patients with kidney disease; = Enbrel to=20 hel patients with rheumatoid arthritis; and Pulmozyne that has prevented = childhood deaths from cystic fibrosis.=20

Mr. Chairman, at this time I would like to submit = for the=20 RECORD a list of 66 other DNA products that are approved by the = FDA.=20 These products have helped ten of millions of patients worldwide.=20

Mr. Chairman, today's, Greenwood Amendment takes = care of=20 both of my concerns on this issue. First and foremost, if defines human = somatic=20 cell nuclear transfer with the intent to initiate a pregnancy as a = criminal act=20 subject to criminal and civil penalties. These penalties include: = Imprisonment=20 of up to 10 years; Civil penalties up to $10 million (or two times the = pecuniary=20 gain from cloning); and it provides for forfeiture of equipment, other = property,=20 and any monetary gains from cloning human beings. In addition, it = requires all=20 individuals who plan to perform human somatic cell nuclear transfer to = register=20 with the FDA. And finally it requires all research be conducted with the = Institutional Review Board's oversight.=20

The Greenwood Amendment also addresses my concern = about=20 restrictions on therapeutic cloning by allowing this important research = to=20 proceed. The goal of therapeutic cloning is to treat or cure patients = with life=20 threatening diseases by creating tailor made, genetically identical = cells that=20 the patient's body will not reject. In other words, this procedure could = allow=20 patients to be cured using their own DNA.=20

In that process the nucleus is removed from a = donated=20 unfertilized egg and replaced with the patient's own cells, like skin, = heart, or=20 nerve cell. These types of cells are called somatic cells. These = unfertilized=20 egg cells are stored in a perti dish to become a source of stem cells = that can=20 be used to treat life-threatening medical conditions. These cells are = not=20 transplanted into a womb and no sperm is used in this procedure.=20

The National Scientists Academy believes that = therapeutic=20 cloning or somatic cell nuclear transplant technology could lead to = dramatic new=20 treatments and cures for currently noncurable diseases and medical = conditions=20 including cancer, diabetes, parkinson's, spinal cord injuries, heart = disease,=20 ALS and many others. We need to find these cures today and this research = may be=20 the key to unlock the cure.=20

Therefore, Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the = Greenwood=20 Amendment and urge all my colleagues to do the same.=20

[End Insert]

=20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20
RECOMBINANT DNA PRODUCTS APPROVED THROUGH DECEMBER 31, = 2001

Product Company Indication Year approved

Actimmune Genetech Inc. and InterMune Pharmaceuticals Inc. Treatment of chronic ganulomatous disease; treatment of severe=20 malignant ostepetrosis 19902000
Activas =7F (alteplase)/Cathflo TM Activase =7F Genentech Inc Treatment of acute myocamprdial infarction (heart attack); acute = massive pulmonary embolism; acute ischemic stroke within first = three hours=20 of systom onset; restoration of function to central venous access = devices=20 (Cathflo Activase) 1987199019962001
Aranesp TM (darbepoietin alfa) Amgen Treatment of anemia asociated with chronic renal failure = 2001
Avonex =7F (interferon beta 1-alpha) Biogen Treatment of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis 1996
BeneFix TM (coagulation factor IX) Genetics Institute (subsidiary of American Home Products) = Treatment of hemophilia B 1997
Betaseron =7F (interferon beta 1-b) Berlex Laboratories and Chiron Corp Treatment of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis 1993
Bioclate TM (antihemophilic factor) Centeon Treatment of hemophilia A; perioperative management of patients = with=20 hemophilia A 1993
BioTropin TM (human growth hormone) Bio-Technology General Corp Treatment of human growth hormone deficiency in children = 1995
Campath =7F (alemtuzumab, recombinant monoclonal antibody) = Ilex Oncology Inc., Millennium Pharmaceuticals Inc. and Berlex=20 Laboratories Inc Treatment of B-cell chronic lymphocytic leukemia (B-CLL) in = patients=20 who have been treated with alkylating agents and who have failed=20 fludarabine therapy 2001
Cerezyme =7F (alglucerase) Genzyme Treatment of Type 1 Gaucher's disease 19911994
Enbrel =7F (etanercept) Immunex Corporation Treatment of moderate to severely active rheumatoid arthritis in = patients who have had an inadequate response to one or more=20 disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs; treatment of polyarticular = course=20 juvenile rheumatoid arthritis; treatment as a first-line therapy = for=20 moderate to severe active rheumatoid arthritis 199819992000
Engerix-B =7F, (hepatitis B vaccine, recombinant) GlaxoSmithKline Hepatitis B vaccine; adults with chronic hepatitis C infection=20 1989; 1998
Epogen =7F (epoietin alfa) Amgen Treatment of anemia associated with chronic renal failure and = anemia=20 in zidovudine-treated HIV patients; pediatric use 1989; 1999
Follistim TM (folitropin beta for injection) Organon Recombinant follicie-stimulating hormone for treatment of = infertility=20 1997
Geno Tropin =7F (semorelin) Pharmacia Treatment of growth hormone deficiency in children; growth = hormone=20 deficiency in adults 1995; 1997
Geref =7F (semorelin) Serono Laboratories Treatment of growth hormone deficiency in children with growth = failure=20 1997
Gonal-F =7F (folicle-stimulating hormone) Serono Laboratories Treatment of infertility in women not due to primary ovarian = failure;=20 treatment of infertility in men and women 1998; 2000
Helixate =7F (antihemophilic factor) Aventis Factor VIII for treatment of hemophilia A; second-generation = factor=20 VIII formulated with sucrose for treatment of hemophilia A = 1994; 2000
Herceptin =7F (trastuzumab, recombinant monoclonal antibody) = Genentech Inc Treatment of patients with metastatic breast cancer whose tumors = overexpress the HER2 receptor 1998
Humalog =7F (human insulin) Eli Lilly and Company Treatment of diabetes 1996
Humatrope =7F (somatotropin) Eli Lilly and Company Treatment of growth hormone deficiency in children; somatotropin = deficiency syndrome in adults 1996; 1997
Humulin =7F (insulin) Eli Lilly and Company Treatment of diabetes 1982
Infergen =7F (interferon alfacon-1) Amgen Treatment of hepatitis C virus (HCV) in patients 18 years or = older=20 with compensated liver disease who have anti-HCV serum antibodies = and/or=20 the presence of HCV RNA; subsequent treatment of HCV-infected = patients who=20 have tolerated an initial course of interferon therapy 1997; 1999
Intron A =7F (alpha interferon) Schering-Plough Corporation Treatment of hairy cell leukemia; gential warts; AIDS-related = Kaposi's=20 sarcoma; non-A, non-B malignant melanoma; extended therapy for = follicular=20 lymphoma in conjunction with chemotherapy; treatment of hepatitis = B in=20 pediatric patients 1986; 1988; 1988; 1991; 1996; 1997; 1997; 1998
Kineret TM (anakinra) Amgen Inc. Treatment of moderately to severely active rheumatoid arthritis = in=20 patients 18 or older who have failed one or more disease-modifying = anti-rheumatic drugs 2001
Kogenate =7F FS (antihemophilic factor) Bayer Corporation Factor VII for treatment hemophilia A; second-generation factor = VII=20 formulated with sucrose for treatment of hemophilia A 1989; 2000
Lantus =7F (insulin glargine) Aventis Biosynthetic basal insulin for adult and pediatric patients with = type=20 2 diabetes 2000
Leukine =7F (granulocyte macrophage colony stimulating factor) = Immunex Corporation Treatment of autologous bone marrow transplantation; treatment = of=20 white blood cell toxicities following induction chemotherapy in = older=20 patients with acute myelogenous leukemia; for use following = allogenic bone=20 marrow transplantation from HLA-matched related donors; for use = mobilizing=20 peripheral blood progenitor cells and for use after PBPC = transplantation=20 1991; 1995; 1995; 1995; 1996
Norditropin =7F (somatropin) Novo Nordisk Treatment of growth hormone deficiency in children 1995
Novolin =7F (human insulin) Novo Nordisk Treatment of diabetes 1982
NovoLog =7F (insulin aspart) Novo Nordisk Insulin analog for adults with diabetes mellitus 2000
NovoSeven =7F (coagulation factor VIIa) Novo Nordisk Treatment of bleeding episodes in hemophilia A or B patients = with=20 inhibitors to factor VIII or factor IX 1999
Nutropin Depot TM (somatropin, injectable suspension) = Genentech Inc. and Alkermes Inc. Long-acting dosage form of recombinant growth hormone (one or = two=20 doses permonth) for pediatric growth bormone deficiency = 1999
Nutropin =7F/Nutropin AQ =7F (somatropin) Genentech Inc. Treatment of growth hormone deficiency in children; growth = hormone=20 deficiency in adults; growth failure associated with chronic renal = insufficiency prior to kidney transplantation; short stature = associated=20 with Turner Syndrome; to improve spine bone mineral density = observed in=20 childhood-onset adult growth hormone-deficent patients and to = increase=20 serum alkaline phosphatase 1993; 1994; 1996; 1996; 1999
LYMrix TM (OspA) SmithKline Beecham Biologicals Prevention of Lyme disease 1998
Mylotarg TM (gemtuzumab ozogamicin) Celltech Chiroscience and Wyeth-Ayerst (American Home Products=20 Corporation) Human antibody linked to calicheamicin (chemotherapeutic) for=20 treatment of CD33 positive acute myeloid leukemia in patients 60 = and older=20 in first relapse who are not considered candidates for cytotoxic=20 chemotherapy 2000
Natrecor =7F (nesiritide) Scios Inc. Treatment of patients with acutely decompensated heart failure = who=20 have syspnea at rest or with minimal activity 2001
Neumega =7F (oprelvekin) Genetics Institute (American Home Products Corporation) = Prevention of severe chemotherapy-induced thromboctopenia in = cancer=20 patients 1997
Nuepogen =7F (filgastim) Amgen Treatment of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia; bone marrow = transplant=20 accompanied neutropenia; severe chronic neutropenia; autologous = bone=20 marrow transplant engraftment or failure; mobilization of = autologous PBPCs=20 after chemotherapy 1991; 1994; 1994; 1995; 1998
Ovidre =7F (human chorionic gonadotropin) Serono Laboratories Treatment of infertility in women 2000
PEG-Intron TM (pegylated version of recombinant interferon = alfa-2b)=20 Enzon Inc. and Schering-Plough Treatment of chronic hepatitis C; combination therapy with = Rebetol of=20 treatment of hepatitis C in patients with compensated liver = disease=20 2001
Procrit =7F (epoietin alfa) Ortho Biotech Inc. Treatment of anemia in AZT-treated HIV patients; anemia in = cancer=20 patients on chemotherapy; for use in anemic patients scheduled to = undergo=20 elective noncardiac, nonvascular surgery 1990; 1993; 1996
Proleukin IL-2 =7F (aldesleukin) Chiron Corporation Treatment of kidney carcinoma; treatment of metastastic melanoma = 1992; 1998
Protropin =7F (somatrem) Genentech Inc. Treatment of growth hormone deficiency in children 1985
Pulmozyme =7F (dornase alfa) Genentech Inc. Treatment of mild to moderate cystic fibrosis; advanced cystic=20 fibrosis; pediatric use in infants three months to 2 years and = children 2=20 to 4 years old 1993; 1996; 1998
Rebetron TM (combination of ribavirin and alpha interferon) = Schering-Plough Corporation Combination therapy for treatment of chronic hepatitis C in = patients=20 with compensated liver disease who have relapsed following alpha=20 interferon treatment; treatment of chronic hepatitis C in patients = with=20 compensated liver disease previously untreated with alpha = interferon=20 therapy 1998
Recombinate =7F rAHF (antihemophilic factor) Baxter Healthcare Corporation Blood-clotting factor VIII for the treatment of hemophilia A = 1992
Recombivax-HB =7F (hepatitis B vaccine) Merck & Company Inc. Hepatitis B vaccine for adolescents and high-risk infants; = adults;=20 dialysis patients; pediatrics 1987; 1987; 1989; 1993
DeFacto =7F (antihemophilic factor) Genetics Institute (American Home Products Corporation) = Control and prevention of hemophilia A and short-term = prophylaxis to=20 reduce bleeding episodes 2000
Refludan =7F (lepirudin) Hoechst Marion Roussel For anticoagulation in patients with heparin-induced = thrombocyto-penia=20 1998
Regranex =7F Gel (gel becaplermin) Ortho-McNeil and Chiron Corporation Platelet-derived growth factor treatment of diabetic foot ulcers = 1997
Remicade TM (infliximab) Centocor Inc. Short-term management of moderately to severely active Crohn's=20 disease, including those patients with fistulae; treatment of = patients=20 with rheumatoid arthritis who have had inadequate response to = methotrexate=20 alone 1998; 1999
ReoPro TM (abciximab) Centocor and Eli Lilly and Company Reduction of acute blood-clot-related complications for = high-risk=20 angioplasty patients; reduction of acute blood clot complications = for all=20 patients undergoing any coronary intervention; treatment of = unstable=20 angina not responding to conventional medical therapy when = percutaneous=20 coronary Iitervention is planned within 24 hours 1994; 1997
Retavase TM (reteplase) Centocor Inc. Management of acute myocardial infarction in adults = (thrombolytic)=20 1996
Rituxan TM (rituximab) IDEC Pharmaceuticals and Genentech Inc. Treatment of relapsed or refactory low-grade or follicular,=20 CD20-positive B-cell non-Hodgkin's lymphoma 1997
Roferon-A =7F (interferon alfa-2a) Hoffmann-La Roche Inc. Treatment of hairy cell leukemia; AIDS-related Kaposi's sarcoma; = chronic phase Philadelphia chromosome positive chronic myelogenous = leukemia; hepatitis C 1986; 1988; 1995; 1995
Saizen =7F (human growth hormone) Serono Laboratories Treatment of growth hormone deficiency in children 1996
Serostim =7F (human growth hormone) Serono Laboratories Treatment of cachexia (AIDS-easting) 1996
Simulect =7F (basiliximab) Novartis Pharmaceutical Corporation and Ligand Pharmaceuticals = Inc.=20 Prevention of acute rejection episodes in kidney transplant=20 recipients; use in renal transplantation in combination with = triple=20 immunosuppressive therapy; use in pediatric renal transplantation = and use=20 of an IV bolus injection 1998; 2001=20
[Page: H1435]

SYNAGIS TM (palivizumab) MedImmune Inc. Prevention of serious lower respiratory tract disease caused by=20 respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) in pediatric patients at high = risk of=20 RSV disease 1998
Thyrogen =7F (thyrotropin alfa) Genzyme Adjunctive diagnostic tool for serum thyroglobulin testing with = or=20 without radioiodine imaging in the follow-up of patients with = thyroid=20 cancer 1998
TNKase TM (tenecteplase) Genentech Inc. Treatment of acute myocardial infarction 2000
Twinrix =7F (hepatitis A and hepatitis B [recombinant] vaccine)=20 SmithKline Beecham Biologicals Immunization against hepatitis A and B viruses 2001
Xigris TM (drotecogin alfa, recombinant) Eli Lilly and Company Treatment of severe, life-threatening sepsis 2001
Zenapax =7F (daclizumab) Hoffmann-La Roche Inc. Prevention of kidney transplant rejection 1997

RECOMBINANT DNA PRODUCTS APPROVED THROUGH DECEMBER 31, = 2001
Product	Company	Indication	Year approved
Actimmune	Genetech Inc. and InterMune Pharmaceuticals Inc.	Treatment of chronic ganulomatous disease; treatment of severe=20 malignant ostepetrosis	19902000
Activas =7F (alteplase)/Cathflo TM Activase =7F	Genentech Inc	Treatment of acute myocamprdial infarction (heart attack); acute = massive pulmonary embolism; acute ischemic stroke within first = three hours=20 of systom onset; restoration of function to central venous access = devices=20 (Cathflo Activase)	1987199019962001
Aranesp TM (darbepoietin alfa)	Amgen	Treatment of anemia asociated with chronic renal failure =	2001
Avonex =7F (interferon beta 1-alpha)	Biogen	Treatment of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis	1996
BeneFix TM (coagulation factor IX)	Genetics Institute (subsidiary of American Home Products) =	Treatment of hemophilia B	1997
Betaseron =7F (interferon beta 1-b)	Berlex Laboratories and Chiron Corp	Treatment of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis	1993
Bioclate TM (antihemophilic factor)	Centeon	Treatment of hemophilia A; perioperative management of patients = with=20 hemophilia A	1993
BioTropin TM (human growth hormone)	Bio-Technology General Corp	Treatment of human growth hormone deficiency in children =	1995
Campath =7F (alemtuzumab, recombinant monoclonal antibody) =	Ilex Oncology Inc., Millennium Pharmaceuticals Inc. and Berlex=20 Laboratories Inc	Treatment of B-cell chronic lymphocytic leukemia (B-CLL) in = patients=20 who have been treated with alkylating agents and who have failed=20 fludarabine therapy	2001
Cerezyme =7F (alglucerase)	Genzyme	Treatment of Type 1 Gaucher's disease	19911994
Enbrel =7F (etanercept)	Immunex Corporation	Treatment of moderate to severely active rheumatoid arthritis in = patients who have had an inadequate response to one or more=20 disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs; treatment of polyarticular = course=20 juvenile rheumatoid arthritis; treatment as a first-line therapy = for=20 moderate to severe active rheumatoid arthritis	199819992000
Engerix-B =7F, (hepatitis B vaccine, recombinant)	GlaxoSmithKline	Hepatitis B vaccine; adults with chronic hepatitis C infection=20	1989; 1998
Epogen =7F (epoietin alfa)	Amgen	Treatment of anemia associated with chronic renal failure and = anemia=20 in zidovudine-treated HIV patients; pediatric use	1989; 1999
Follistim TM (folitropin beta for injection)	Organon	Recombinant follicie-stimulating hormone for treatment of = infertility=20	1997
Geno Tropin =7F (semorelin)	Pharmacia	Treatment of growth hormone deficiency in children; growth = hormone=20 deficiency in adults	1995; 1997
Geref =7F (semorelin)	Serono Laboratories	Treatment of growth hormone deficiency in children with growth = failure=20	1997
Gonal-F =7F (folicle-stimulating hormone)	Serono Laboratories	Treatment of infertility in women not due to primary ovarian = failure;=20 treatment of infertility in men and women	1998; 2000
Helixate =7F (antihemophilic factor)	Aventis	Factor VIII for treatment of hemophilia A; second-generation = factor=20 VIII formulated with sucrose for treatment of hemophilia A =	1994; 2000
Herceptin =7F (trastuzumab, recombinant monoclonal antibody) =	Genentech Inc	Treatment of patients with metastatic breast cancer whose tumors = overexpress the HER2 receptor	1998
Humalog =7F (human insulin)	Eli Lilly and Company	Treatment of diabetes	1996
Humatrope =7F (somatotropin)	Eli Lilly and Company	Treatment of growth hormone deficiency in children; somatotropin = deficiency syndrome in adults	1996; 1997
Humulin =7F (insulin)	Eli Lilly and Company	Treatment of diabetes	1982
Infergen =7F (interferon alfacon-1)	Amgen	Treatment of hepatitis C virus (HCV) in patients 18 years or = older=20 with compensated liver disease who have anti-HCV serum antibodies = and/or=20 the presence of HCV RNA; subsequent treatment of HCV-infected = patients who=20 have tolerated an initial course of interferon therapy	1997; 1999
Intron A =7F (alpha interferon)	Schering-Plough Corporation	Treatment of hairy cell leukemia; gential warts; AIDS-related = Kaposi's=20 sarcoma; non-A, non-B malignant melanoma; extended therapy for = follicular=20 lymphoma in conjunction with chemotherapy; treatment of hepatitis = B in=20 pediatric patients	1986; 1988; 1988; 1991; 1996; 1997; 1997; 1998
Kineret TM (anakinra)	Amgen Inc.	Treatment of moderately to severely active rheumatoid arthritis = in=20 patients 18 or older who have failed one or more disease-modifying = anti-rheumatic drugs	2001
Kogenate =7F FS (antihemophilic factor)	Bayer Corporation	Factor VII for treatment hemophilia A; second-generation factor = VII=20 formulated with sucrose for treatment of hemophilia A	1989; 2000
Lantus =7F (insulin glargine)	Aventis	Biosynthetic basal insulin for adult and pediatric patients with = type=20 2 diabetes	2000
Leukine =7F (granulocyte macrophage colony stimulating factor) =	Immunex Corporation	Treatment of autologous bone marrow transplantation; treatment = of=20 white blood cell toxicities following induction chemotherapy in = older=20 patients with acute myelogenous leukemia; for use following = allogenic bone=20 marrow transplantation from HLA-matched related donors; for use = mobilizing=20 peripheral blood progenitor cells and for use after PBPC = transplantation=20	1991; 1995; 1995; 1995; 1996
Norditropin =7F (somatropin)	Novo Nordisk	Treatment of growth hormone deficiency in children	1995
Novolin =7F (human insulin)	Novo Nordisk	Treatment of diabetes	1982
NovoLog =7F (insulin aspart)	Novo Nordisk	Insulin analog for adults with diabetes mellitus	2000
NovoSeven =7F (coagulation factor VIIa)	Novo Nordisk	Treatment of bleeding episodes in hemophilia A or B patients = with=20 inhibitors to factor VIII or factor IX	1999
Nutropin Depot TM (somatropin, injectable suspension) =	Genentech Inc. and Alkermes Inc.	Long-acting dosage form of recombinant growth hormone (one or = two=20 doses permonth) for pediatric growth bormone deficiency =	1999
Nutropin =7F/Nutropin AQ =7F (somatropin)	Genentech Inc.	Treatment of growth hormone deficiency in children; growth = hormone=20 deficiency in adults; growth failure associated with chronic renal = insufficiency prior to kidney transplantation; short stature = associated=20 with Turner Syndrome; to improve spine bone mineral density = observed in=20 childhood-onset adult growth hormone-deficent patients and to = increase=20 serum alkaline phosphatase	1993; 1994; 1996; 1996; 1999
LYMrix TM (OspA)	SmithKline Beecham Biologicals	Prevention of Lyme disease	1998
Mylotarg TM (gemtuzumab ozogamicin)	Celltech Chiroscience and Wyeth-Ayerst (American Home Products=20 Corporation)	Human antibody linked to calicheamicin (chemotherapeutic) for=20 treatment of CD33 positive acute myeloid leukemia in patients 60 = and older=20 in first relapse who are not considered candidates for cytotoxic=20 chemotherapy	2000
Natrecor =7F (nesiritide)	Scios Inc.	Treatment of patients with acutely decompensated heart failure = who=20 have syspnea at rest or with minimal activity	2001
Neumega =7F (oprelvekin)	Genetics Institute (American Home Products Corporation) =	Prevention of severe chemotherapy-induced thromboctopenia in = cancer=20 patients	1997
Nuepogen =7F (filgastim)	Amgen	Treatment of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia; bone marrow = transplant=20 accompanied neutropenia; severe chronic neutropenia; autologous = bone=20 marrow transplant engraftment or failure; mobilization of = autologous PBPCs=20 after chemotherapy	1991; 1994; 1994; 1995; 1998
Ovidre =7F (human chorionic gonadotropin)	Serono Laboratories	Treatment of infertility in women	2000
PEG-Intron TM (pegylated version of recombinant interferon = alfa-2b)=20	Enzon Inc. and Schering-Plough	Treatment of chronic hepatitis C; combination therapy with = Rebetol of=20 treatment of hepatitis C in patients with compensated liver = disease=20	2001
Procrit =7F (epoietin alfa)	Ortho Biotech Inc.	Treatment of anemia in AZT-treated HIV patients; anemia in = cancer=20 patients on chemotherapy; for use in anemic patients scheduled to = undergo=20 elective noncardiac, nonvascular surgery	1990; 1993; 1996
Proleukin IL-2 =7F (aldesleukin)	Chiron Corporation	Treatment of kidney carcinoma; treatment of metastastic melanoma =	1992; 1998
Protropin =7F (somatrem)	Genentech Inc.	Treatment of growth hormone deficiency in children	1985
Pulmozyme =7F (dornase alfa)	Genentech Inc.	Treatment of mild to moderate cystic fibrosis; advanced cystic=20 fibrosis; pediatric use in infants three months to 2 years and = children 2=20 to 4 years old	1993; 1996; 1998
Rebetron TM (combination of ribavirin and alpha interferon) =	Schering-Plough Corporation	Combination therapy for treatment of chronic hepatitis C in = patients=20 with compensated liver disease who have relapsed following alpha=20 interferon treatment; treatment of chronic hepatitis C in patients = with=20 compensated liver disease previously untreated with alpha = interferon=20 therapy	1998
Recombinate =7F rAHF (antihemophilic factor)	Baxter Healthcare Corporation	Blood-clotting factor VIII for the treatment of hemophilia A =	1992
Recombivax-HB =7F (hepatitis B vaccine)	Merck & Company Inc.	Hepatitis B vaccine for adolescents and high-risk infants; = adults;=20 dialysis patients; pediatrics	1987; 1987; 1989; 1993
DeFacto =7F (antihemophilic factor)	Genetics Institute (American Home Products Corporation) =	Control and prevention of hemophilia A and short-term = prophylaxis to=20 reduce bleeding episodes	2000
Refludan =7F (lepirudin)	Hoechst Marion Roussel	For anticoagulation in patients with heparin-induced = thrombocyto-penia=20	1998
Regranex =7F Gel (gel becaplermin)	Ortho-McNeil and Chiron Corporation	Platelet-derived growth factor treatment of diabetic foot ulcers =	1997
Remicade TM (infliximab)	Centocor Inc.	Short-term management of moderately to severely active Crohn's=20 disease, including those patients with fistulae; treatment of = patients=20 with rheumatoid arthritis who have had inadequate response to = methotrexate=20 alone	1998; 1999
ReoPro TM (abciximab)	Centocor and Eli Lilly and Company	Reduction of acute blood-clot-related complications for = high-risk=20 angioplasty patients; reduction of acute blood clot complications = for all=20 patients undergoing any coronary intervention; treatment of = unstable=20 angina not responding to conventional medical therapy when = percutaneous=20 coronary Iitervention is planned within 24 hours	1994; 1997
Retavase TM (reteplase)	Centocor Inc.	Management of acute myocardial infarction in adults = (thrombolytic)=20	1996
Rituxan TM (rituximab)	IDEC Pharmaceuticals and Genentech Inc.	Treatment of relapsed or refactory low-grade or follicular,=20 CD20-positive B-cell non-Hodgkin's lymphoma	1997
Roferon-A =7F (interferon alfa-2a)	Hoffmann-La Roche Inc.	Treatment of hairy cell leukemia; AIDS-related Kaposi's sarcoma; = chronic phase Philadelphia chromosome positive chronic myelogenous = leukemia; hepatitis C	1986; 1988; 1995; 1995
Saizen =7F (human growth hormone)	Serono Laboratories	Treatment of growth hormone deficiency in children	1996
Serostim =7F (human growth hormone)	Serono Laboratories	Treatment of cachexia (AIDS-easting)	1996
Simulect =7F (basiliximab)	Novartis Pharmaceutical Corporation and Ligand Pharmaceuticals = Inc.=20	Prevention of acute rejection episodes in kidney transplant=20 recipients; use in renal transplantation in combination with = triple=20 immunosuppressive therapy; use in pediatric renal transplantation = and use=20 of an IV bolus injection	1998; 2001=20 [Page: H1435]
SYNAGIS TM (palivizumab)	MedImmune Inc.	Prevention of serious lower respiratory tract disease caused by=20 respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) in pediatric patients at high = risk of=20 RSV disease	1998
Thyrogen =7F (thyrotropin alfa)	Genzyme	Adjunctive diagnostic tool for serum thyroglobulin testing with = or=20 without radioiodine imaging in the follow-up of patients with = thyroid=20 cancer	1998
TNKase TM (tenecteplase)	Genentech Inc.	Treatment of acute myocardial infarction	2000
Twinrix =7F (hepatitis A and hepatitis B [recombinant] vaccine)=20	SmithKline Beecham Biologicals	Immunization against hepatitis A and B viruses	2001
Xigris TM (drotecogin alfa, recombinant)	Eli Lilly and Company	Treatment of severe, life-threatening sepsis	2001
Zenapax =7F (daclizumab)	Hoffmann-La Roche Inc.	Prevention of kidney transplant rejection	1997

The CHAIRMAN pro tempore (Mr. Simpson). = The=20 question is on the amendment in the nature of a substitute offered by = the=20 gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Greenwood).=20

The question was taken; and the Chairman pro = tempore=20 announced that the noes appeared to have it.=20

RECORDED VOTE=20

Mr. DEUTSCH. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded = vote.=20

A recorded vote was ordered.=20

The vote was taken by electronic device, and there=20 were--ayes 174, noes 231, answered ``present'' 1, not voting 28, as = follows:=20

[Roll No. 37] AYES--174

Abercrombie=20

Allen=20

Andrews=20

Baird=20

Baldwin=20

Ballance=20

Bass=20

Becerra=20

Bell=20

Berkley=20

Berman=20

Biggert=20

Bishop (NY)=20

Blumenauer=20

Boehlert=20

Bono=20

Boswell=20

Boucher=20

Boyd=20

Bradley (NH)=20

Brady (PA)=20

Brown (OH)=20

Capps=20

Capuano=20

Cardin=20

Cardoza=20

Case=20

Castle=20

Clay=20

Clyburn=20

Conyers=20

Cooper=20

Crowley=20

Cummings=20

Davis (AL)=20

Davis (CA)=20

Davis (FL)=20

Davis (IL)=20

DeGette=20

Delahunt=20

DeLauro=20

Deutsch=20

Dicks=20

Dingell=20

Doggett=20

Dooley (CA)=20

Emanuel=20

Engel=20

Eshoo=20

Etheridge=20

Evans=20

Farr=20

Fattah=20

Frank (MA)=20

Frost=20

Gibbons=20

Gilchrest=20

Gonzalez=20

Gordon=20

Granger=20

Green (TX)=20

Greenwood=20

Grijalva=20

Gutierrez=20

Harman=20

Hastings (FL)=20

Hinchey=20

Holt=20

Honda=20

Hooley (OR)=20

Houghton=20

Hoyer=20

Inslee=20

Israel=20

Jackson (IL)=20

Jackson-Lee (TX)=20

Johnson (CT)=20

Johnson, E. B.=20

Jones (OH)=20

Kelly=20

Kennedy (RI)=20

Kilpatrick=20

Kind=20

Kirk=20

Kleczka=20

Kolbe=20

Lampson=20

Langevin=20

Lantos=20

Larsen (WA)=20

Larson (CT)=20

Leach=20

Lee=20

Levin=20

Lewis (GA)=20

Lofgren=20

Lowey=20

Lynch=20

Majette=20

Maloney=20

Markey=20

Matheson=20

Matsui=20

McCarthy (NY)=20

McCollum=20

McDermott=20

McGovern=20

Meehan=20

Meek (FL)=20

Meeks (NY)=20

Menendez=20

Miller (NC)=20

Miller, George=20

Moore=20

Moran (VA)=20

Nadler=20

Napolitano=20

Neal (MA)=20

Obey=20

Olver=20

Ose=20

Owens=20

Pallone=20

Pascrell=20

Pastor=20

Pelosi=20

Price (NC)=20

Pryce (OH)=20

Ramstad=20

Rangel=20

Reyes=20

Rodriguez=20

Ross=20

Rothman=20

Roybal-Allard=20

Ruppersberger=20

Rush=20

Sabo=20

Sanchez, Linda T.=20

Sandlin=20

Schakowsky=20

Schiff=20

Scott (GA)=20

Scott (VA)=20

Serrano=20

Shays=20

Sherman=20

Simmons=20

Slaughter=20

Smith (WA)=20

Solis=20

Spratt=20

Stark=20

Strickland=20

Tanner=20

Tauscher=20

Thomas=20

Thompson (CA)=20

Thompson (MS)=20

Tierney=20

Towns=20

Udall (CO)=20

Udall (NM)=20

Van Hollen=20

Velazquez=20

Visclosky=20

Watson=20

Watt=20

Waxman=20

Weiner=20

Wexler=20

Wilson (NM)=20

Woolsey=20

Wynn=20

NOES--231

Aderholt=20

Akin=20

Alexander=20

Bachus=20

Baker=20

Ballenger=20

Barrett (SC)=20

Bartlett (MD)=20

Barton (TX)=20

Beauprez=20

Bereuter=20

Berry=20

Bilirakis=20

Bishop (GA)=20

Bishop (UT)=20

Blackburn=20

Blunt=20

Boehner=20

Bonilla=20

Bonner=20

Boozman=20

Brady (TX)=20

Brown (SC)=20

Brown-Waite, Ginny=20

Burgess=20

Burns=20

Burr=20

Buyer=20

Calvert=20

Camp=20

Cannon=20

Cantor=20

Capito=20

Carson (OK)=20

Carter=20

Chabot=20

Chocola=20

Coble=20

Cole=20

Collins=20

Costello=20

Cox=20

Cramer=20

Crane=20

Crenshaw=20

Cubin=20

Culberson=20

Cunningham=20

Davis (TN)=20

Davis, Jo Ann=20

Davis, Tom=20

Deal (GA)=20

DeLay=20

DeMint=20

Diaz-Balart, M.=20

Doolittle=20

Doyle=20

Dreier=20

Duncan=20

Dunn=20

Edwards=20

Ehlers=20

Emerson=20

English=20

Everett=20

Feeney=20

Ferguson=20

Flake=20

Fletcher=20

Foley=20

Forbes=20

Fossella=20

Franks (AZ)=20

Frelinghuysen=20

Garrett (NJ)=20

Gerlach=20

Gillmor=20

Gingrey=20

Goode=20

Goodlatte=20

Goss=20

Graves=20

Green (WI)=20

Gutknecht=20

Hall=20

Harris=20

Hart=20

Hastings (WA)=20

Hayes=20

Hayworth=20

Hefley=20

Hensarling=20

Herger=20

Hill=20

Hobson=20

Hoekstra=20

Holden=20

Hostettler=20

Hulshof=20

Hunter=20

Isakson=20

Issa=20

Istook=20

Janklow=20

Jefferson=20

Jenkins=20

John=20

Johnson (IL)=20

Johnson, Sam=20

Jones (NC)=20

Kanjorski=20

Kaptur=20

Keller=20

Kennedy (MN)=20

Kildee=20

King (IA)=20

King (NY)=20

Kingston=20

Kline=20

Knollenberg=20

Kucinich=20

LaHood=20

Latham=20

LaTourette=20

Lewis (CA)=20

Lewis (KY)=20

Linder=20

LoBiondo=20

Lucas (KY)=20

Lucas (OK)=20

Manzullo=20

Marshall=20

McCotter=20

McHugh=20

McInnis=20

McIntyre=20

McKeon=20

McNulty=20

Mica=20

Michaud=20

Miller (FL)=20

Miller (MI)=20

Mollohan=20

Moran (KS)=20

Murphy=20

Murtha=20

Musgrave=20

Myrick=20

Nethercutt=20

Ney=20

Northup=20

Norwood=20

Nunes=20

Nussle=20

Oberstar=20

Osborne=20

Otter=20

Oxley=20

Paul=20

Pearce=20

Pence=20

Peterson (PA)=20

Petri=20

Pickering=20

Pitts=20

Platts=20

Pombo=20

Pomeroy=20

Porter=20

Portman=20

Putnam=20

Quinn=20

Radanovich=20

Rahall=20

Regula=20

Rehberg=20

Renzi=20

Reynolds=20

Rogers (AL)=20

Rogers (KY)=20

Rogers (MI)=20

Rohrabacher=20

Royce=20

Ryan (OH)=20

Ryan (WI)=20

Ryun (KS)=20

Sanders=20

Saxton=20

Schrock=20

Sensenbrenner=20

Sessions=20

Shadegg=20

Shaw=20

Sherwood=20

Shimkus=20

Shuster=20

Simpson=20

Skelton=20

Smith (NJ)=20

Smith (TX)=20

Souder=20

Stearns=20

Stenholm=20

Stupak=20

Sullivan=20

Sweeney=20

Tancredo=20

Tauzin=20

Taylor (MS)=20

Taylor (NC)=20

Terry=20

Thornberry=20

Tiahrt=20

Tiberi=20

Toomey=20

Turner (OH)=20

Turner (TX)=20

Upton=20

Vitter=20

Walden (OR)=20

Walsh=20

Wamp=20

Weldon (FL)=20

Weldon (PA)=20

Weller=20

Whitfield=20

Wicker=20

Wilson (SC)=20

Wolf=20

Wu=20

Young (AK)=20

ANSWERED ``PRESENT''--1

=20

Filner=20

=20

NOT VOTING--28

Ackerman=20

Baca=20

Brown, Corrine=20

Burton (IN)=20

Carson (IN)=20

Combest=20

DeFazio=20

Diaz-Balart, L.=20

Ford=20

Gallegly=20

Gephardt=20

Hinojosa=20

Hoeffel=20

Hyde=20

Lipinski=20

McCarthy (MO)=20

McCrery=20

Millender-McDonald=20

Miller, Gary=20

Ortiz=20

Payne=20

Peterson (MN)=20

Ros-Lehtinen=20

Sanchez, Loretta=20

Smith (MI)=20

Snyder=20

Waters=20

Young (FL)=20

ANNOUNCEMENT BY THE CHAIRMAN PRO TEMPORE=20

The CHAIRMAN pro tempore (Mr. Gilchrest) = (during=20 the vote). The Chair will remind Members that there are 2 minutes left = to this=20 vote.=20

[Time: 16:58]

Messrs. HILL, SOUDER, BOOZMAN, EVERETT and TURNER = of Ohio=20 changed their vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''=20

Ms. WOOLSEY changed her vote from ``no'' to = ``aye.''=20

So the amendment in the nature of a substitute was=20 rejected.=20

The result of the vote was announced as above = recorded.=20

Stated for:=20

[Begin Insert]

Ms. McCARTHY of Missouri. Mr. Chairman, during = rollcall=20 vote No. 37, I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would = have voted=20 ``aye.''=20

[End Insert]

[Time: 17:00]

The CHAIRMAN pro tempore (Mr. Gilchrest). = Under=20 the rule, the Committee rises.=20

Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker = pro=20 tempore (Mr. Simpson) having assumed the chair, Mr. = Gilchrest,=20 Chairman pro tempore of the Committee of the Whole House on the State of = the=20 Union, reported that that Committee, having had under consideration the = bill=20 (H.R. 534) to amend title 18, United States Code, to prohibit human = cloning,=20 pursuant to House Resolution 105, he reported the bill back to the House = with an=20 amendment adopted by the Committee of the Whole.=20

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the rule, the = previous=20 question is ordered.=20

The question is on the amendment.=20

The amendment was agreed to.=20

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the = engrossment=20 and third reading of the bill.=20

The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a = third time,=20 and was read the third time.=20

PARLIAMENTARY INQUIRY=20

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Parliamentary inquiry, Mr. = Speaker.=20

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman will state = it.=20

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Would it be true that the = quicker the=20 Members take their seats and calm down, the quicker we can vote and get = to the=20 airport?=20

The SPEAKER pro tempore. That is not a proper = parliamentary=20 inquiry.=20

MOTION TO RECOMMIT OFFERED BY MS. LOFGREN=20

Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Speaker, I offer a motion to = recommit.=20

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is the gentlewoman opposed = to the=20 bill?=20

Ms. LOFGREN. I certainly am, Mr. Speaker.=20

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the = motion=20 to recommit.=20

The Clerk read as follows:=20

Page 4, line 24, strike the close quotation mark = and the=20 period that follows.=20

Page 4, after line 24, insert the following:=20

``(e) EXEMPTION OF MEDICAL TREATMENT.--The=20 prohibitions of this section do not apply to the shipping, receipt, or=20 importation of any product derived from an embryo (including pluripotent = stem=20 cells) designed for use in medical treatment for or to cure Parkinson's = disease,=20 Alzheimer's disease, diabetes, cancer, heart disease, spinal cord = injury,=20 multiple sclerosis, severe burns, or other diseases, disorders, or = conditions,=20 provided that the product of such use is not utilized to initiate a = pregnancy=20 and is not intended to be utilized to initiate a pregnancy and is unable = to=20 develop into a full human being. Nothing in this subsection shall exempt = any=20 product from any applicable regulatory approval.''.=20

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the=20 gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lofgren) is recognized for 5 = minutes=20 in support of her motion.=20

Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Speaker, I first yield 1 minute to = the=20 gentlewoman from Wisconsin (Ms. Baldwin), my colleague on the = Committee=20 on the Judiciary.=20

Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. Speaker, who among us could tell a = person=20 suffering from cancer or Alzheimer's disease, you cannot import the cure = that=20 would save your life, and if you do, you will face a 10-year prison = sentence?=20 Who could face their families and tell them they could not have the cure = because=20 the stem cell treatment that would have saved their loved ones' lives = was=20 derived from therapeutic cloning?=20

The wondrous promise held out by the advances in = embryonic=20 stem cell research is that we will one day be able to diminish human = suffering,=20 heal, treat and, yes, save lives.=20

If you support this bill, and a cure is discovered = outside=20 the United States for a devastating disease, would you deny life to our = fellow=20 Americans?=20

I urge my colleagues to vote for this motion to = recommit=20 and against H.R. 534.=20

Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Speaker, this bill not only ties = the hands=20 of our medical researchers; it prevents Americans from utilizing cures = developed=20 in other countries. There is no doubt that if this bill becomes law, we = will=20 lose our most talented medical researchers. They will flock to other = countries=20 that continue to allow therapeutic cloning; and hopefully, one day, they = will=20 help to develop cures to some of the worst diseases known to humankind.=20

What happens when a British researcher develops a = cure for=20 Alzheimer's or is able to regenerate insulin-producing cells in children = with=20 juvenile diabetes or learns how to generate nervous system cells that = can=20 restore spinal cord function after paralysis? Sick Americans should have = access=20 to these cures. But H.R. 534 prevents the importation of any products = derived=20 from somatic cell nuclear transfer. It would make it a crime for a=20 terminally-ill person to receive medical care in America if the cure was = developed using this science abroad.=20

That is both unnecessary and unfair. The motion to = recommit=20 is simple. It will ensure that cures developed in other countries are = available=20 to Americans suffering from Parkinson's, Alzheimer's, diabetes, cancer, = heart=20 disease, spinal cord injury, MS, severe burns, and other diseases.=20

If cures to these debilitating diseases are found, = Congress=20 should not stand in the way or require its citizens to travel to other = countries=20 to benefit from them.=20

There have been lots of argument today about a = slippery=20 slope. There is no slippery slope in this motion.=20

Mr. Speaker, I have been deeply troubled by many of = the=20 arguments I have heard today. I am troubled that some Members think they = have=20 the right to impose their religious beliefs on all Americans. I am = troubled that=20 in return, some of the most vulnerable members of society, like children = suffering from juvenile diabetes, would be forced potentially to give up = their=20 best hope for a cure.=20

This country is a democracy; it is not a theocracy. = I=20 understand that some Members of this House have religious beliefs that = are=20 guiding them. My advice to them would be, if you object to the cures = that are=20 developed using this technology of therapeutic cloning, fine, do not use = the=20 cure. But do not try and deny other Americans cures to deadly diseases = because=20 of your own religious beliefs. That is simply an improper role for = Congress to=20 take.=20

Therapeutic cloning has nothing to do with cloning = a child.=20 There is no fertilization with sperm, there is no implantation into the = uterus,=20 there is no pregnancy, there is no child.=20

Somatic cell nuclear transfer is a scientific = method where=20 researchers create new stem cells in a petri dish. To listen to some of = the=20 debate today, one would see that there would be a picture painted that = very tiny=20 babies in test tubes are being the subject of this research. That is = completely=20 false. These are eight cells on a petri dish that can give lifesaving = cures to=20 Americans and others throughout the world who are suffering horrendous = diseases.=20

I think we ought to take the advice of Senator=20 Hatch and former First Lady Nancy Reagan who wrote, ``The = embryonic=20 stem cell research, under appropriate guidelines, may provide our = scientists=20 with many answers that are now beyond our grasp. There are so many = diseases that=20 can be cured, or at least helped, that we can't turn our backs on = this.''=20

Do not turn your backs on the millions of Americans = who=20 might be able to benefit from cures made abroad.=20

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in = opposition to the=20 motion to recommit.=20

Mr. Speaker, this merely moves offshore what this = bill bans=20 in the United States. What it will do is create a huge financial = incentive for=20 those people and companies in foreign countries to take advantage of = Americans.=20 I do not think that we should be giving foreign companies that kind of = financial=20 advantage. If it is wrong to do here, we should prohibit the importation = of=20 these materials.=20

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the = previous=20 question is ordered on the motion to recommit.=20

There was no objection.=20

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the = motion to=20 recommit.=20

The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore = announced that the noes appeared to have it.=20

RECORDED VOTE=20

Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote. =

A recorded vote was ordered.=20

The SPEAKER pro tempore. This will be a 15-minute = vote.=20 Pursuant to clause 9 of rule XX, the Chair will reduce to 5 minutes the = minimum=20 time for any electronic vote on the question of passage.=20

The vote was taken by electronic device, and there=20 were--ayes 164, noes 237, not voting 33, as follows:=20

[Roll No. 38] AYES--164

Abercrombie=20

Allen=20

Andrews=20

Baird=20

Baldwin=20

Ballance=20

Becerra=20

Bell=20

Berkley=20

Berman=20

Bishop (GA)=20

Bishop (NY)=20

Blumenauer=20

Bono=20

Boswell=20

Boucher=20

Brady (PA)=20

Brown (OH)=20

Capps=20

Capuano=20

Cardin=20

Cardoza=20

Case=20

Castle=20

Clay=20

Clyburn=20

Conyers=20

Cooper=20

Crowley=20

Cummings=20

Davis (CA)=20

Davis (FL)=20

Davis (IL)=20

DeGette=20

Delahunt=20

DeLauro=20

Deutsch=20

Dicks=20

Dingell=20

Doggett=20

Dooley (CA)=20

Emanuel=20

Engel=20

Eshoo=20

Etheridge=20

Evans=20

Farr=20

Fattah=20

Filner=20

Frank (MA)=20

Gibbons=20

Gonzalez=20

Gordon=20

Green (TX)=20

Greenwood=20

Grijalva=20

Gutierrez=20

Harman=20

Hastings (FL)=20

Hinchey=20

Holt=20

Honda=20

Hooley (OR)=20

Houghton=20

Hoyer=20

Inslee=20

Israel=20

Jackson (IL)=20

Jackson-Lee (TX)=20

Jefferson=20

Johnson (CT)=20

Johnson, E. B.=20

Jones (OH)=20

Kennedy (RI)=20

Kilpatrick=20

Kind=20

Kleczka=20

Kolbe=20

Lampson=20

Langevin=20

Lantos=20

Larsen (WA)=20

Larson (CT)=20

Leach=20

Lee=20

Levin=20

Lewis (GA)=20

Lofgren=20

Lowey=20

Lynch=20

Majette=20

Maloney=20

Markey=20

Marshall=20

Matsui=20

McCarthy (NY)=20

McCollum=20

McDermott=20

McGovern=20

Meehan=20

Meek (FL)=20

Meeks (NY)=20

Menendez=20

Miller (NC)=20

Miller, George=20

Moore=20

Moran (VA)=20

Nadler=20

Napolitano=20

Neal (MA)=20

Obey=20

Olver=20

Ose=20

Owens=20

Pallone=20

Pascrell=20

Pastor=20

Pelosi=20

Price (NC)=20

Ramstad=20

Rangel=20

Reyes=20

Rodriguez=20

Ross=20

Rothman=20

Roybal-Allard=20

Ruppersberger=20

Rush=20

Sabo=20

Sanchez, Linda T.=20

Sandlin=20

Schakowsky=20

Schiff=20

Scott (GA)=20

Scott (VA)=20

Serrano=20

Shays=20

Sherman=20

Simmons=20

Slaughter=20

Smith (WA)=20

Solis=20

Spratt=20

Stark=20

Strickland=20

Tanner=20

Tauscher=20

Thompson (CA)=20

Thompson (MS)=20

Tierney=20

Towns=20

Udall (CO)=20

Udall (NM)=20

Van Hollen=20

Velazquez=20

Visclosky=20

Watson=20

Watt=20

Waxman=20

Weiner=20

Wexler=20

Woolsey=20

Wu=20

Wynn=20

NOES--237

Aderholt=20

Akin=20

Alexander=20

Bachus=20

Baker=20

Ballenger=20

Barrett (SC)=20

Bartlett (MD)=20

Barton (TX)=20

Bass=20

Beauprez=20

Bereuter=20

Berry=20

Biggert=20

Bilirakis=20

Bishop (UT)=20

Blackburn=20

Blunt=20

Boehlert=20

Boehner=20

Bonilla=20

Bonner=20

Boozman=20

Bradley (NH)=20

Brady (TX)=20

Brown (SC)=20

Brown-Waite, Ginny=20

Burgess=20

Burns=20

Burr=20

Buyer=20

Calvert=20

Camp=20

Cannon=20

Cantor=20

Capito=20

Carson (OK)=20

Carter=20

Chabot=20

Chocola=20

Coble=20

Cole=20

Collins=20

Costello=20

Cox=20

Cramer=20

Crane=20

Crenshaw=20

Cubin=20

Culberson=20

Cunningham=20

Davis (AL)=20

Davis (TN)=20

Davis, Jo Ann=20

Davis, Tom=20

Deal (GA)=20

DeLay=20

DeMint=20

Diaz-Balart, M.=20

Doolittle=20

Doyle=20

Dreier=20

Duncan=20

Dunn=20

Edwards=20

Ehlers=20

Emerson=20

English=20

Everett=20

Feeney=20

Ferguson=20

Flake=20

Fletcher=20

Foley=20

Forbes=20

Fossella=20

Franks (AZ)=20

Frelinghuysen=20

Garrett (NJ)=20

Gerlach=20

Gilchrest=20

Gillmor=20

Gingrey=20

Goode=20

Goodlatte=20

Goss=20

[Page: H1438]

Granger=20

Graves=20

Green (WI)=20

Gutknecht=20

Hall=20

Harris=20

Hart=20

Hastings (WA)=20

Hayes=20

Hayworth=20

Hefley=20

Hensarling=20

Herger=20

Hill=20

Hobson=20

Hoekstra=20

Holden=20

Hostettler=20

Hulshof=20

Hunter=20

Isakson=20

Issa=20

Istook=20

Janklow=20

Jenkins=20

John=20

Johnson (IL)=20

Johnson, Sam=20

Jones (NC)=20

Kanjorski=20

Kaptur=20

Keller=20

Kelly=20

Kennedy (MN)=20

Kildee=20

King (IA)=20

King (NY)=20

Kingston=20

Kirk=20

Kline=20

Knollenberg=20

Kucinich=20

LaHood=20

Latham=20

LaTourette=20

Lewis (CA)=20

Lewis (KY)=20

Linder=20

LoBiondo=20

Lucas (KY)=20

Lucas (OK)=20

Manzullo=20

Matheson=20

McCotter=20

McHugh=20

McIntyre=20

McKeon=20

McNulty=20

Mica=20

Michaud=20

Miller (FL)=20

Miller (MI)=20

Mollohan=20

Moran (KS)=20

Murphy=20

Murtha=20

Musgrave=20

Myrick=20

Nethercutt=20

Northup=20

Norwood=20

Nunes=20

Nussle=20

Oberstar=20

Osborne=20

Otter=20

Oxley=20

Paul=20

Pearce=20

Pence=20

Peterson (PA)=20

Petri=20

Pickering=20

Pitts=20

Platts=20

Pombo=20

Pomeroy=20

Porter=20

Portman=20

Pryce (OH)=20

Putnam=20

Quinn=20

Radanovich=20

Rahall=20

Regula=20

Rehberg=20

Renzi=20

Reynolds=20

Rogers (AL)=20

Rogers (KY)=20

Rogers (MI)=20

Rohrabacher=20

Royce=20

Ryan (OH)=20

Ryan (WI)=20

Ryun (KS)=20

Saxton=20

Schrock=20

Sensenbrenner=20

Sessions=20

Shadegg=20

Shaw=20

Sherwood=20

Shimkus=20

Shuster=20

Simpson=20

Skelton=20

Smith (NJ)=20

Smith (TX)=20

Souder=20

Stearns=20

Stenholm=20

Stupak=20

Sullivan=20

Sweeney=20

Tancredo=20

Tauzin=20

Taylor (MS)=20

Taylor (NC)=20

Terry=20

Thomas=20

Thornberry=20

Tiahrt=20

Tiberi=20

Toomey=20

Turner (OH)=20

Turner (TX)=20

Upton=20

Vitter=20

Walden (OR)=20

Walsh=20

Wamp=20

Weldon (FL)=20

Weldon (PA)=20

Weller=20

Whitfield=20

Wicker=20

Wilson (NM)=20

Wilson (SC)=20

Wolf=20

Young (AK)=20

NOT VOTING--33

Ackerman=20

Baca=20

Boyd=20

Brown, Corrine=20

Burton (IN)=20

Carson (IN)=20

Combest=20

DeFazio=20

Diaz-Balart, L.=20

Ford=20

Frost=20

Gallegly=20

Gephardt=20

Hinojosa=20

Hoeffel=20

Hyde=20

Lipinski=20

McCarthy (MO)=20

McCrery=20

McInnis=20

Millender-McDonald=20

Miller, Gary=20

Ney=20

Ortiz=20

Payne=20

Peterson (MN)=20

Ros-Lehtinen=20

Sanchez, Loretta=20

Sanders=20

Smith (MI)=20

Snyder=20

Waters=20

Young (FL)=20

ANNOUNCEMENT BY THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE=20

The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Simpson) = (during the=20 vote). Members are advised that 2 minutes remain in this vote.=20

[Time: 17:25]

Mr. GILCHREST changed his vote from = ``aye'' to=20 ``no.''=20

So the motion to recommit was rejected.=20

The result of the vote was announced as above = recorded.=20

Stated for:=20

[Begin Insert]

Ms. MCCARTHY of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, = during=20 rollcall vote No. 38, I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I = would=20 have voted ``aye.''=20

[End Insert]

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the = passage of=20 the bill.=20

The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore = announced that the ayes appeared to have it.=20

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand = the yeas=20 and nays.=20

The yeas and nays were ordered.=20

The SPEAKER pro tempore. This is a 5-minute vote.=20

The vote was taken by electronic device, and there=20 were--yeas 241, nays 155, not voting 38, as follows:=20

[Roll No. 39] YEAS--241

Aderholt=20

Akin=20

Alexander=20

Bachus=20

Baker=20

Ballenger=20

Barrett (SC)=20

Bartlett (MD)=20

Beauprez=20

Bereuter=20

Berry=20

Bilirakis=20

Bishop (GA)=20

Bishop (UT)=20

Blackburn=20

Blunt=20

Boehner=20

Bonilla=20

Bonner=20

Bono=20

Boozman=20

Bradley (NH)=20

Brady (TX)=20

Brown (SC)=20

Brown-Waite, Ginny=20

Burgess=20

Burns=20

Burr=20

Buyer=20

Calvert=20

Camp=20

Cannon=20

Cantor=20

Capito=20

Carson (OK)=20

Carter=20

Chabot=20

Chocola=20

Coble=20

Cole=20

Collins=20

Costello=20

Cox=20

Cramer=20

Crane=20

Crenshaw=20

Cubin=20

Culberson=20

Cunningham=20

Davis (AL)=20

Davis (TN)=20

Davis, Jo Ann=20

Davis, Tom=20

Deal (GA)=20

DeLay=20

DeMint=20

Diaz-Balart, M.=20

Dingell=20

Doolittle=20

Doyle=20

Dreier=20

Duncan=20

Dunn=20

Ehlers=20

Emerson=20

English=20

Everett=20

Feeney=20

Ferguson=20

Flake=20

Fletcher=20

Foley=20

Forbes=20

Fossella=20

Franks (AZ)=20

Frelinghuysen=20

Garrett (NJ)=20

Gerlach=20

Gibbons=20

Gillmor=20

Gingrey=20

Goode=20

Goodlatte=20

Gordon=20

Goss=20

Granger=20

Graves=20

Green (WI)=20

Gutknecht=20

Hall=20

Harris=20

Hart=20

Hastings (WA)=20

Hayes=20

Hayworth=20

Hefley=20

Hensarling=20

Herger=20

Hill=20

Hobson=20

Hoekstra=20

Holden=20

Hostettler=20

Hulshof=20

Hunter=20

Isakson=20

Issa=20

Istook=20

Janklow=20

Jefferson=20

Jenkins=20

John=20

Johnson (IL)=20

Johnson, Sam=20

Jones (NC)=20

Kanjorski=20

Keller=20

Kelly=20

Kennedy (MN)=20

Kildee=20

King (IA)=20

King (NY)=20

Kingston=20

Kirk=20

Kline=20

Knollenberg=20

Kucinich=20

LaHood=20

Langevin=20

Larsen (WA)=20

Latham=20

LaTourette=20

Lewis (CA)=20

Lewis (KY)=20

Linder=20

LoBiondo=20

Lucas (KY)=20

Lucas (OK)=20

Lynch=20

Manzullo=20

Marshall=20

Matheson=20

McCotter=20

McHugh=20

McKeon=20

McNulty=20

Mica=20

Michaud=20

Miller (FL)=20

Miller (MI)=20

Mollohan=20

Moran (KS)=20

Murphy=20

Murtha=20

Musgrave=20

Myrick=20

Nethercutt=20

Northup=20

Norwood=20

Nunes=20

Nussle=20

Osborne=20

Otter=20

Oxley=20

Pascrell=20

Pearce=20

Pence=20

Peterson (PA)=20

Petri=20

Pickering=20

Pitts=20

Platts=20

Pombo=20

Pomeroy=20

Porter=20

Portman=20

Putnam=20

Quinn=20

Radanovich=20

Rahall=20

Regula=20

Rehberg=20

Renzi=20

Reyes=20

Reynolds=20

Rogers (AL)=20

Rogers (KY)=20

Rogers (MI)=20

Rohrabacher=20

Ross=20

Royce=20

Ryan (OH)=20

Ryan (WI)=20

Ryun (KS)=20

Sanders=20

Saxton=20

Schrock=20

Sensenbrenner=20

Sessions=20

Shadegg=20

Shaw=20

Sherwood=20

Shimkus=20

Shuster=20

Simpson=20

Skelton=20

Smith (NJ)=20

Smith (TX)=20

Souder=20

Stearns=20

Stenholm=20

Stupak=20

Sullivan=20

Sweeney=20

Tancredo=20

Tanner=20

Tauzin=20

Taylor (MS)=20

Taylor (NC)=20

Terry=20

Thomas=20

Thornberry=20

Tiahrt=20

Tiberi=20

Toomey=20

Turner (OH)=20

Turner (TX)=20

Upton=20

Walden (OR)=20

Walsh=20

Wamp=20

Weldon (FL)=20

Weldon (PA)=20

Weller=20

Whitfield=20

Wicker=20

Wilson (NM)=20

Wilson (SC)=20

Wolf=20

Wu=20

Young (AK)=20

NAYS--155

Abercrombie=20

Allen=20

Andrews=20

Baird=20

Baldwin=20

Ballance=20

Bass=20

Becerra=20

Bell=20

Berkley=20

Berman=20

Biggert=20

Bishop (NY)=20

Blumenauer=20

Boehlert=20

Boswell=20

Boucher=20

Brady (PA)=20

Brown (OH)=20

Capps=20

Capuano=20

Cardin=20

Cardoza=20

Case=20

Castle=20

Clay=20

Clyburn=20

Conyers=20

Cooper=20

Crowley=20

Cummings=20

Davis (CA)=20

Davis (FL)=20

Davis (IL)=20

DeGette=20

Delahunt=20

DeLauro=20

Deutsch=20

Dicks=20

Doggett=20

Dooley (CA)=20

Edwards=20

Emanuel=20

Engel=20

Eshoo=20

Etheridge=20

Evans=20

Farr=20

Fattah=20

Filner=20

Frank (MA)=20

Gilchrest=20

Gonzalez=20

Green (TX)=20

Greenwood=20

Grijalva=20

Gutierrez=20

Harman=20

Hastings (FL)=20

Hinchey=20

Holt=20

Honda=20

Hooley (OR)=20

Houghton=20

Hoyer=20

Inslee=20

Israel=20

Jackson (IL)=20

Jackson-Lee (TX)=20

Johnson (CT)=20

Johnson, E. B.=20

Jones (OH)=20

Kaptur=20

Kennedy (RI)=20

Kilpatrick=20

Kind=20

Kleczka=20

Kolbe=20

Lampson=20

Lantos=20

Larson (CT)=20

Leach=20

Lee=20

Levin=20

Lewis (GA)=20

Lofgren=20

Lowey=20

Majette=20

Maloney=20

Markey=20

Matsui=20

McCollum=20

McDermott=20

McGovern=20

Meehan=20

Meek (FL)=20

Meeks (NY)=20

Menendez=20

Miller (NC)=20

Miller, George=20

Moore=20

Moran (VA)=20

Nadler=20

Napolitano=20

Neal (MA)=20

Obey=20

Olver=20

Ose=20

Owens=20

Pallone=20

Pastor=20

Paul=20

Pelosi=20

Price (NC)=20

Pryce (OH)=20

Ramstad=20

Rangel=20

Rodriguez=20

Rothman=20

Roybal-Allard=20

Ruppersberger=20

Rush=20

Sabo=20

Sanchez, Linda T.=20

Sandlin=20

Schakowsky=20

Schiff=20

Scott (GA)=20

Scott (VA)=20

Shays=20

Sherman=20

Simmons=20

Slaughter=20

Smith (WA)=20

Solis=20

Spratt=20

Stark=20

Strickland=20

Tauscher=20

Thompson (CA)=20

Thompson (MS)=20

Tierney=20

Towns=20

Udall (CO)=20

Udall (NM)=20

Van Hollen=20

Velazquez=20

Visclosky=20

Watson=20

Watt=20

Waxman=20

Weiner=20

Wexler=20

Woolsey=20

Wynn=20

NOT VOTING--38

Ackerman=20

Baca=20

Barton (TX)=20

Boyd=20

Brown, Corrine=20

Burton (IN)=20

Carson (IN)=20

Combest=20

DeFazio=20

Diaz-Balart, L.=20

Ford=20

Frost=20

Gallegly=20

Gephardt=20

Hinojosa=20

Hoeffel=20

Hyde=20

Lipinski=20

McCarthy (MO)=20

McCarthy (NY)=20

McCrery=20

McInnis=20

McIntyre=20

Millender-McDonald=20

Miller, Gary=20

Ney=20

Oberstar=20

Ortiz=20

Payne=20

Peterson (MN)=20

Ros-Lehtinen=20

Sanchez, Loretta=20

Serrano=20

Smith (MI)=20

Snyder=20

Vitter=20

Waters=20

Young (FL)=20

The SPEAKER (during the vote). There are 2 minutes=20 remaining in this vote.=20

[Time: 17:32]

So the bill was passed.=20

The result of the vote was announced as above = recorded.=20

A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.=20

Stated for:=20

[Begin Insert]

Mr. VITTER. Mr. Speaker, I was inadvertently absent = for=20 rollcall vote 39. Were I present, I would have voted ``aye'' in support = of H.R.=20 534, the Human Cloning Prohibition Act.=20

[End Insert]

Stated against:=20

[Begin Insert]

Ms. McCARTHY of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, during = rollcall vote=20 No. 39, I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have = voted=20 ``no.''=20

[End Insert]

END