Human Cloning Success Startles Lawmakers
Jolted by new human cloning experiments, Congress on Monday grappled with a controversial scientific advance that threatens to outpace political solutions.
One key player in the cloning debate vowed to move ahead quickly on legislation to ban the practice, while another urged lawmakers to carefully consider the scientific issues before acting. And President Bush reiterated his opposition to any cloning of embryos, no matter the purpose. He told reporters: “We should not as a society grow life to destroy it.”
Sen. Sam Brownback (R-Kan.), chief sponsor of a bill to ban human cloning, said he would seek a vote on a ban--or at least try to buy time with a research moratorium--by year’s end.
He called the announcement by Advanced Cell Technology Inc. that it had briefly cloned human embryos in pursuit of disease cures and treatments “a startling development.”
Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) argued that researchers should weigh in before Congress acts on an issue of such immense ethical and scientific importance. “It needs a lot of analysis,” Specter said.
But at the end of the day, it was unclear whether the Massachusetts company’s Sunday announcement would accelerate the timetable on legislation that already had been moving in fits and starts.
On July 31, as Bush was deliberating the related issue of stem-cell research, the House voted 265-162 to ban human cloning. Days later, on Aug. 9, the president announced an administrative policy that limited federal funding for stem-cell research to studies done only on colonies derived from existing stem-cell lines.
Stem cells are medically valuable because they can grow into any type of cell or tissue in the human body. One goal of the researchers pursuing embryonic cloning is to produce new sources of stem cells.
Despite the public attention in recent years to cloning sheep and cows, few politicians--if any--support cloning to create human children. That ability does not appear imminent. But some politicians fear that a ban on human embryonic cloning now could shut down fruitful avenues of medical research in the fight against Parkinson’s disease, diabetes and other ailments.
Critics call cloning for medical purposes--dubbed “therapeutic,” as opposed to “reproductive”--morally repugnant. They view that sort of cloning as setting up a human life for destruction.
Senate Debate Planned for Next Year
Debate flared intensely last summer but subsided after the Sept. 11 attacks on the Pentagon and World Trade Center, which turned the nation’s attention to the war against terrorism. The Senate, after a preliminary, little-noticed skirmish over stem-cell research and cloning in late October, agreed on Nov. 1 to schedule debate on these topics for early next year.
Then came the announcement.
Advanced Cell Technology reported, through an online scientific journal, that it had created cloned human embryos able to survive for several days. It was the first such report of its kind. The privately held company, which did not need federal approval to conduct its research, is hoping to get a patent so it can profit from cloning technology.
At first blush, the report seems to signal that Congress does not have the luxury of an extended timetable to consider the ethics of cloning. House Majority Whip Tom DeLay (R-Texas) on Monday seized on the announcement to raise pressure on the Senate to “quickly pass legislation . . . to ban this unconscionable experimentation.”
But Doug Hattaway, a spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle (D-S.D.), said Monday that the Senate’s schedule had not changed. Daschle, he said, is committed to holding a vote in February or March--and no sooner.
Hattaway said Daschle remains opposed to reproductive cloning but supports cloning for medical research.
“A lot of senators need time to learn more and think through what is a very complicated issue,” Hattaway said.
Specter Wants to Shed ‘Scientific Light’ on Issue
Specter, the top Republican on the Senate Appropriations subcommittee that handles federal labor, education and health programs, said he is hoping to hold hearings on cloning and stem cells before the full chamber acts.
“We need to bring some scientific light on this subject,” Specter said. “I don’t see how it can be accommodated on [this year’s] calendar.”
On many socially charged issues, lawmakers are able to hold rapid debates and votes without seeking more than a cursory amount of new expertise. Nearly all members of Congress know where they stand on abortion rights, for instance, or gun control.
But cloning is different. Brownback’s cloning-ban bill has 12 co-sponsors, none from the Senate’s slim Democratic majority. Dozens of senators have yet to state positions.
A Senate Republican aide said Monday that the GOP members, while generally backing a ban on cloning and the Bush position, had not yet decided on a tactical legislative approach.
“There [are] severe concerns over [cloning], of course,” said the aide, speaking on condition of anonymity. “We’re all against human cloning. But Congress has only a few weeks left. It’s unclear at this point what [Senate Republicans] want to do.”
At a Capitol Hill news conference with a coalition of anti-cloning groups, Brownback said he would not rule out any legislative weapons that would halt the research.
“Let’s get to the fundamental debate,” he said. “Does the human embryo have any moral significance? We’re treating it today as if it were cattle or frogs.”
While he said he had not yet consulted with leading senators to schedule floor action, Brownback added that he would insist on a vote by the end of the year.
Sunday’s announcement, he said, “has caught us all off-guard.”
*
Times staff writer James Gerstenzang contributed to this report.
