Diana DeGette

Ms. DeGETTE

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

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

Ms. DeGETTE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey).

Ms. DeGETTE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Cleaver).

Ms. DeGETTE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished Democratic leader (Ms. Pelosi).

Ms. DeGETTE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.

Ms. DeGETTE. Mr. Speaker, my colleagues, this is a sad day for America. But what is so sad is that our opponents would so distort the facts to stop research that would benefit so many. Many have talked today about the so-called snowflake babies, embryos which are donated to other couples. I don't oppose that. I think that is great. But right now couples undergoing IVF treatment have three options for the spare embryos that are necessarily created. They can freeze them for future use by themselves. They can donate them to other couples, as several hundred have done, or they can say that the embryos that are left over should be destroyed as medical waste, and tens of thousands of those embryos have been destroyed. All we say today, give those couples a fourth choice. Let those embryos that would thrown away as medical waste be donated for ethical embryonic stem cell research. The opponents of this bill also continue to claim that adult stem cell and core blood cells are just as good as embryonic stem cells. Shame on them. This is a bald lie. Harold Varmus, the former director of the NIH, said just this week, compared to adult stem cells, embryonic stem cells have a much greater potential according to all existing scientific literature. Let's not distort the facts just for a political argument. This Congress has been politicizing science in a way that the American public disagrees with. Earlier this year, we tried to assert our jurisdiction over end-of-life decisions with the terrible vote that we took in the Terry Schiavo case. Now, today, we are trying to stop ethical scientific research that could help tens of millions of people. Many on the other side say, well, the taxpayers shouldn't fund this research. Excuse me, I thought we had a national consensus, 72 percent of Americans agree with this precept, people who are Democrats, Republicans, independents, prolife, prochoice. I don't know who decided that they were God and that Congress could not fund this research, because their religious thinking trumps the national consensus. A majority of my constituents don't think we should fund the war. Does that mean we shouldn't fund the war? Of course not. We need this ethical research. We need it for our colleague, Jim Langevin, so he can walk again. We need it for our colleague, Lane Evans, whose Parkinson's has made him so sick that he cannot be here today to vote to override this bill. Let's give hope to millions of Americans. Let's give hope for ethical research. Let us override this veto.

Ms. DeGETTE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 4 minutes. Mr. Speaker, today the President of the United States has snuffed out the candle of hope for 110 million Americans who suffer from debilitating diseases like diabetes, Parkinson's, Alzheimer's, nerve damage and many, many more. He snuffed out this candle of hope because he used the first veto of his 6-year Presidency to veto H.R. 810, the embryonic stem cell legislation. Mr. Speaker, this is the President's first veto in over 1,100 bills. The President issued veto warnings in nearly 150 bills, but he signed all of those bills. The President has signed bills to increase the national debt. He has signed bills to increase tax cuts for wealthy corporations and oil companies. He signed hundreds of post office naming bills, but he decided he would veto this one bill. This is not some minor legislation. This is legislation that would foster the only research that has shown hope for millions of Americans. He said in his veto message that he was vetoing this legislation because ``American taxpayers would be compelled to fund the deliberate destruction of human embryos.'' One might think that the President would read this bill, his first veto, before he said that, because if he had read that bill, he would know that H.R. 810 specifically does not allow Federal funds to be used for the destruction of embryos. Rather, H.R. 810 says that Federal dollars can be used for the research on embryonic stem cell lines which have already been created with private dollars. This policy is the same as the policy President Bush looked at in 2001 when he issued an executive order restricting the number of stem cell lines used. What he said at that time was embryonic stem cell research was okay, but he limited it to embryonic stem cell lines in existence as of that day. So I ask the President, why is it wrong to simply expend Federal money for stem cell lines that have been created by private researchers since that date? It seems wrong, and it is certainly not what this bill is intended to do. The President wants it both ways. He wants to say that he supports embryonic stem cell research, but he doesn't want to do it in a way that will actually effect cures. Mr. Speaker, it seems to me that the President is confused about his role as chief executive of this country. We don't live in a theocracy. We live in a constitutional democracy in this country where we form a consensus about ethics and medical research. There is a widespread consensus. The public supports this almost three-quarters. Prolife, prochoice, Democrat, Republican, Independent, all of them share the same concern that we protect lives, but that we expand research in a way that will benefit millions and millions of Americans. I urge this House to take this very seriously. Don't make a political vote. Think about the lives that could be saved. Think about what H.R. 810 actually does, and vote ``yes'' to override this veto. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. DeGETTE. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. DeGETTE. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee) for a unanimous consent request. (Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Ms. DeGETTE. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Eshoo).

Ms. DeGETTE. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Slaughter).

Ms. DeGETTE. Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Capps), another fine leader in this movement.

Ms. DeGETTE. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield for the purpose of making a unanimous consent request to the gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr. Kennedy). (Mr. KENNEDY of Rhode Island asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Ms. DeGETTE. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 4 minutes to the distinguished Democratic whip, Mr. Hoyer.

Ms. DeGETTE. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the distinguished member of the Energy and Commerce Committee, Mr. Engel.

Ms. DeGETTE

Ms. DeGETTE. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Engel).

Ms. DeGETTE

Ms. DeGETTE. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Ms. DeGETTE. Mr. Speaker, I have no further speakers, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. DeGETTE. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Wisconsin (Ms. Baldwin).

Ms. DeGETTE. Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr. Langevin). (Mr. LANGEVIN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

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

Ms. DeGETTE. Mr. Speaker, I would just correct the gentleman from Nebraska. I was in England over the Memorial Day recess, meeting with all of the major researchers. None of them have found clinical application in just taking cells out of embryos. They all agree that embryonic stem cell research shows the most promise. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to my distinguished colleague from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey).

Ms. DeGETTE. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Delaware (Mr. Castle) and the prime cosponsor of H.R. 810.

Ms. DeGETTE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to myself. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to S. 2754, the so-called Alternative Pluripotent Stem Cell Therapies Enhancement Act. This bill may seem innocuous on its face. It just tells the Secretary of HHS to research these alternative therapies. But, in fact, it has several key problems. The first one is it sets a disturbing precedent. The bill requires the Secretary of HHS to conduct research into so- called alternative therapies. These therapies, however, do not exist. And they would shift precious resources from the NIH into this fake research that doesn't really exist. Secondly, as a member of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, I am very concerned when we direct the NIH to pursue one type of research over another. Congress never directs the course of research. Imagine if we told the NIH, Congress, I guess because we are the uber researchers now, to pursue one type of cancer research over another type of cancer research. Thirdly, alternative methods for creating pluripotent stem cells are not a real scientific prospect at this time. As I mentioned during the debate on the last piece of legislation, these types of research have been hypothesized from time to time, but no one has actually had any clinical application. The only promise has been shown in embryonic stem cell research. Frankly, this bill does worse than nothing. This bill diverts attention and resources away from embryonic stem cell research, which is the research that really shows promise for diseases that affect tens of millions of people, diseases like nerve damage, Alzheimer's, Parkinson's and so many others. I support all legitimate research, but Congress and the White House should not be giving false hope to patients across America who just want to have cures for their diseases. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.