H. Res. 105, Rule for Consideration of for H.R. 534,  the Human Cloning Prohibition Act of 2003

U.S. Rep. Jim McGovern
House Floor Statement
February 3, 2003

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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