Skip to comments.Sponsor of Stem Cell Bill Says Senate Could Override a Veto
Posted on 05/26/2005 4:47:32 PM PDT by neverdem
WASHINGTON, May 25 - Senator Arlen Specter, the Pennsylvania Republican and chief sponsor of a bill to expand federal financing for human embryonic stem cell research, issued a stark challenge to President Bush on Wednesday, saying he had enough votes in the Senate to override a presidential veto of the measure.
"I don't like veto threats, and I don't like statements about overriding veto threats," Mr. Specter said, speaking at a news conference where the House backers of the measure presented him the legislation, which passed the House on Tuesday, topped with a red bow.
"But if a veto threat is going to come from the White House, then the response from the Congress is to override the veto, if we can," Mr. Specter added. "Last year we had a letter signed by some 58 senators, and we had about 20 more in the wings. I think if it really comes down to a showdown, we will have enough in the United States Senate to override a veto."
But the House majority leader, Representative Tom DeLay of Texas, said the bill, which garnered a majority that fell 52 votes short of the two-thirds majority required to overturn a veto, would "never become law." And Mr. Bush, appearing at a news conference with the president of Indonesia, Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, restated his opposition.
"I believe that the use of federal monies that end up destroying life is not - is not positive, it's not good," Mr. Bush said. "And so, therefore, I'm against the extension of the research, of using more federal dollars on new embryonic stem cell lines."
The back-and-forth came as Mr. Specter and other supporters of embryonic stem cell research made a push for the Senate to take up the legislation. The majority leader, Senator Bill Frist of...
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
After checking this link, which seems to be undergoing improvement, I don't think they will be making much progress in a petri dish. If anyone knows of any better links on human embryology, I would appreciate it if you let me know.
The senate might be able to override the veto, but I doubt the house could.
The Frankenspecter speaks!
I think the last tactic to use against W is a showdown....
I think we all know he won't back down, especially from Specter...
What an absolute creep he is.
Wish DeLay would hammer this bast*rd back to the stone age.
So Specter couldn't be bothered to hang around DC today to vote on Bolton, but he's announcing he's all set to override the President's veto on funding embryonic stem cell research? !@#$%!!!
Does Specter have Cancer or AIDS? I have heard conflicting stories.
Geez, these bozos can't get judges through, can't vote on Bolton, etc. but say they can override a pie-in-the-sky scheme of "promise" based on unsure science?
Why do all the "embryonic stem cells will cure all ills" goofballs consistently say missile defense is "impossible" or a manned mission to Mars is "unfeasible and probably impossible" or drilling and refining our own oil "will kill everything on the planet", or "if we kill that one snail darter the entire eco-system will collapse", blah, blah, blah?
Inconsistency in argument is as bad as hypocrisy.
I think we all know he won't back down, especially from Specter...
The last thing we want to see is pictures of Arlen Specter in his underwear in a British newspaper! :)
IIRC, he has a type of lymphoma called Hodgkin's disease.
At least one recent study suggests that the longer the stem cells hang around undifferentiated in vitro, the greater the chance of them turning cancerous in vivo.
Unfortunately, I don't have a link to the article I read. I believe it applied to both embryonic and non-embryonic stem cells used in animal studies.
Reeve didn't become HAIRLESS from his spinal injury.
I heard tonight that it was Specter's refusal to say how he would vote on the nuclear option that priompted Republican leaders to send deWine out to make the best deal he could. He must be dying, because he sure has no fear this week....and he really owes Bush.
Yes, the same is basically true of any cell that you culture outside of the body. We don't necessarily know of all the growth factors they need to group and develop properly. Also, we are putting them under selection pressures that favor cells that divide rapidly. Manipulation of the DNA damages it in often unintended ways. By the time you put it back into the body, you really have changed it in many ways, many of them undetectable. And you can't really practically sequence its whole genome before you do, to make sure that you've only changed the things you wanted.
The way I understood it was that it was President Bush who sent Dewine and Graham in to make the best compromise possible as Frist could not count on Specter for the 51st vote - Specter would not commit one way or another.
WOW. Verrrrry interesting. I have no idea if it's true, but it sure sounds plausible to me.
I too had wondered why Reeve had no hair --not even eyebrows left.
I heard that too. And before I heard it, I suspected it.
I think some folks are stomping a bit too hard on DeWine and Graham without knowing the full story. We'll see how this all plays out.
IMO there is a masterful chess game being played here, and it will NOT end in a win for the Dims.
That said, it's still true that Specter is a rat.
How can we find out why Reeve was HAIRLESS?? Any ideas? What else makes one totally HAIRLESS except chemotherapy?
Well, that's nice that Spectre doesn't like a power available to all President's to check the Legislative Body from behaving as Lords, but I'm sure the President could equally rebut he doesn't appreciate a Senator unappreciative of the efforts to help him keep his Senate seat.
The Senate's actions on this are meaningless, I believe, provided the House doesn't provide a 2/3rd's vote.
He had Alopecia which causes your hair to fall out in clumps and makes it look patchy, so he gave up and shaved it.
Maybe next time the President will think twice before helping a liberal republican win a primary.
"Maybe next time the President will think twice before helping a liberal republican win a primary."
I think there may be a lot of STRATEGERY going on behind the scenes.
I've been as frustrated as everyone else the last few days, but this puts a bit of a different light on the compromise.
I think this poker hand will be played out in time - I'm holding judgement until it does.
And Specter is still a POS.
The President's Council On Bioethics has a great backgrounder site (a .gov site) that can extend education on stem cells and has lots of diagrams, etc. I'm not on my own computer or I could give you the link and several other really good sites. Perhaps hocndoc can offer it.
I think we both know the reason: they want to justify the continued slaughter of the unborn. The advances in ultrasound technology have been helping the pro-life cause, so they're looking for some kind of counter-argument, and frankly, they're grasping at straws.
Between you and me, it is what one expects of servants to evil when they ignore and reject the whispers of God's Holy Spirit of conviction. HUman need to self-justify will go to astonishingly bad lengths to justify past wrongful decisions. Once wholesale slaughter has been defended for three plus decades, the need in the dead human 'heart' is to justify and ANY direction that seems to have a high ideal (though it really be cannibalism) is a tool to push God away and seem to raise human choice to godlike power. To awaken is to die to self, and self-promoters/self-agrandizers cannot abide that! Sadly, they ARE taking this once great nation down the slippery funnel to Hell with them, now intending to use cannibalism as the grease for slide.
Agreed. I pray they do not succeed.
Is this the link?
Well, that's nice, Senator, but the Senate can't override a veto on its own.
[ http://bioethicsprint.bioethics.gov ] Might find more pathways at that addy.
Well, you've also got to remember that liberalism runs very strongly through the scientific community. I am presently in an academic setting and it is standard practice to look down on any research that is privately funded, especially if it is funded by a pharmaceutical company. For many scientists, your funding is only pure if it comes from the government. However, you are just as likely to overstate the importance of any data to justify the renewal of a government funded grant as you are a pharmaceutical. And you are also much more prone to channel the results to confirm whatever pet theory meets the approval of liberal ideology - witness most global warming research. The two "premiere" scientific journals - Nature and Science - are AS political, if not more so than anything you will see in the NYT. It is considered very presitigious to be published in these journals, but, if you examine them closely you will see that most of the articles fall within a very narrow range of topics - and they almost all conform to the liberal view of the world. Therefore, any paper extolling the virtues of embryonic stem cells will be strongly considered by these journals. The same for any paper which purports to support the failed global warming models. And anyone who departs from this orthodoxy is the subject of scathing criticism and not so subtle threats to pull their grant funding!
Did his eyebrows and eyelashes all out in clumps also or did he shave those off also?
What is Alopecia and what is i caused from?
What is Alopecia and what is i caused from? Is that what he died from? If not, what did he die from?
Thanks for the links. I'm in the process of reading your paper. I'm up to page 14 of the pdf.
Mr. Reeve was being treated for a pressure wound, a common complication for people in wheelchairs, said his publicity agent, Wesley Combs. These wounds result from constant pressure in one spot, reducing the blood to that area and finally killing the affected tissue.
Mr. Combs said that Mr. Reeve fell into a coma on Saturday. The wound had become severely infected, and the infection spread through his body.
If you enter the same title into the Times' search engine, you first get the Oct 12, 2004 version of their obituary, for which the Times wants an archival fee.
Maybe you missed comment# 23, but I thought it and its links explained the causes of alopecia fairly well for most folks.
November 26, 2001: In the November 26, 2001 issue of People Weekly, Christopher Reeve confirmed that for three decades he has suffered from Alopecia Areata, "an incurable disease affecting 4 million people that results in varying degrees of hair loss." Reeve said in the interview: "I first had it when I was 16. All my life it's come and gone. It started with a bald spot right at the crown of my head. In all that time some hair (on my head) would fall out and then grow back. But in the last year it has been more apparent than usual. (For the first time) it's affected my eyebrows, but they are growing back. There's no real explanation for it. It's kind of like allergies. Sometimes people have a good season and a bad season. So in the last six months in particular I've lost more hair than usual. The fact is I'm in the best health I've been in since the accident in '95. I'm stronger and I'm progessing with physical therapy. That's why it's so ironic that because my hair fell out, people have been concerned about my health." Reeve receives cortisone shots in the scalp every three weeks to treat his hair loss.
Whether this claim was for real, or was just a cover story (so to speak), I guess we can't know.
I've always thought the claim that Reeve died from blood infection due to a pressure sore, was a little suspicious, however.
Everybody who's known bedridden or chair-ridden persons well knows that pressure sores are a hazard; but that with good care they can be prevented. Pressure sores are more likely to occur with people whose care is neglected.
So I find it odd that Reeve, a wealthy man with all kinds of help, ended up dying from a pressure sore. But that is the official story-line.
Thanks for the info. I agree...dying from a pressure wound seems unlikely since he had the best of care...his wife!
Is it the good Hodgkin's?
I don't know.
It's become more and more apparent that we don't hold the high cards -- in the senate.
What has been mistaken for a lack of action by our president and the missing body parts of our senate leader is actually a large herd of pathetic Republican-In-Name-Only Senators.
|***ACTION ALERT***||Saturday, May 28, 2005|
Romney delivers on promise to veto stem cell bill
By Theo Emery, Associated Press Writer | May 27, 2005
BOSTON -- Gov. Mitt Romney vetoed a bill Friday that would expand embryonic stem cell research in Massachusetts, but the measure has more than enough support in the Legislature to override the governor's veto.
The House and Senate passed the bill with veto-proof margins, and both chambers were expected to vote next week to override the veto.
You must encourage your fellow parishoners (family, friends) to contact their legislators by calling the State House switchboard at 617-722-2000 or by e-mailing your state senator (click here)and state representative (click here), urging them to support the Governor's final veto before a vote (likely Tuesday, May 31st) and this legislation becomes law!
To find your elected officials:
See: Timeline (including Roll Call Votes) -- What's Happened So Far
FORWARD THIS E-MAIL ON TO FAMILY AND FRIENDS IN MASSACHUSETTS!!!
Catholic Citizenship is a non-partisan organization which promotes public policy education and Catholic laity involvement in the political process. Catholic Citizenship is headed by former U.S. Ambassador to the Vatican, Raymond Flynn.
I just hope the House sticks with President Bush. Arlen Specter (R?-PA) should not embarrass Bush with an override. Especially after the Senate wimped on his judges. These Senate RINOS are as dangerous as the Democrat lefty socialists.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.