Missouri Prop 2

[Phil Lilley]

Misleading measure may launch U.S. cloning

October 16, 2006

BY ROBERT NOVAK Sun-Times Columnist

A new video available on YouTube marks a late attempt by pro-life forces to avert serious defeat in Missouri Nov. 7, with national implications. Cathy Ruse, speaking for Missourians Against Human Cloning, declares: "Amendment 2 is a fraud. It is an attempt to trick Missourians into approving -- in their Constitution -- human cloning, the right of biotech firms to do human cloning in Missouri -- something Missourians oppose by an overwhelming majority."

But Amendment 2 is identified for many Missouri voters by the language at the beginning of the five-page, 2,000-word ballot initiative: "No person may clone or attempt to clone a human being." That explains why polls have shown a substantial margin of support for the constitutional amendment, also backed by key Republican politicians and business interests. It seems to offer the best of all worlds: government support of stem cell research without fear of cloning.

The problem is that the proposal so narrowly defines cloning as to open the door in Missouri to any cloning procedure that takes place outside the womb. If this is approved by a state that historically is a barometer of national trends and is considered a pro-life stronghold, it will be a national model for breaking popular resistance to what the scientists and biotech companies want.

A campaign costing an estimated $20 million has helped build a substantial lead for the amendment. A September poll by the Republican firm McLaughlin & Associates shows a 59 percent to 31 percent advantage. Democrats appear to have no doubt, favoring it 75 to 22, with only 3 percent undecided. But Republicans are split, 40 percent in support and 45 against, with 15 percent undecided.

Big Republican names -- former Sen. John Danforth, Gov. Matt Blunt and party contributor Sam Fox -- support the amendment. The $2 billion-endowed Stowers Institute in Kansas City, funded by GOP benefactors, spearheads the campaign.

That establishment Republican support for Amendment 2 has created a difficult situation for first-term GOP Sen. Jim Talent, engaged in a difficult re-election campaign. I reported Talent's "defection from the anti-cloning ranks" in February when he took his name off a Senate bill to ban cloning on grounds it might hamper acceptable scientific research.

Talent at that time was taking no position on Amendment 2, but he has since come out against it. In a recent debate with the Democratic Senate candidate, state Auditor Claire McCaskill, on NBC's "Meet the Press," Talent said the proposal "would create ... an unqualified constitutional right to clone the earliest stages of human life. " But he hastened to add he is not against stem cell research.

McCaskill sought to cast the debate in terms of whether the candidates are for or against the medical miracles that can be achieved through stem cell research. She proclaimed "I come down on the side of hope, hope of cures and supporting science." But she put this in the framework of the constitutional amendment that, she said, "strictly prohibits human cloning."

This confrontation on what is in the ballot proposition is enough to confuse voters. Amendment 2 bans only cloning that involves planting an embryo within the womb. It specifically prohibits government from interfering with somatic cell nuclear transfer, which involves replacing the nucleus of a human egg outside the womb -- the cloning procedure used to produce Dolly the sheep.

Unequivocally, the proposal tries to keep politicians from interfering with its approved cloning process: "[N]o state or local government body or official shall eliminate, reduce, deny or withhold any public funds provided or eligible to be provided to a person that lawfully conducts stem cell research or provides stem cell therapies and cures."

This language, contends the YouTube video, "provides biotech firms a blank check for taxpayer dollars to support unethical and unproven research that Missourians oppose." If government-approved cloning can be sold to the barometer pro-life state of Missouri, it will show up next in other states with major research facilities.

Also, see video at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QlPG_276j8Q

[Wayne SW/MO]

(4) No person may, for valuable consideration, purchase or sell human blastocysts or eggs for stem cell research or stem cell therapies and cures.

(5) Human blastocysts and eggs obtained for stem cell research or stem cell therapies and cures must have been donated with voluntary and informed consent, documented in writing.

Amendment 2 bans only cloning that involves planting an embryo within the womb. It specifically prohibits government from interfering with somatic cell nuclear transfer, which involves replacing the nucleus of a human egg outside the womb -- the cloning procedure used to produce Dolly the sheep.

This is somewhat misleading. First and formost is that the initiative has to do with Stem Cell research, and human cloning beyond that would be outside the scope of the measure, and second this procedure for stem cell creation is considered too expensive at present to develop a large following. The key is "expensive", hence "(4) No person may, for valuable consideration, purchase or sell human blastocysts or eggs for stem cell research or stem cell therapies and cures."

[hank franklin]

I wonder if the opponents of Amendment 2 realize that it has big-time Republican support, including Gov. Matt Blunt.

And if those who suggest this issue be left to the elected officials, and not the state constitution, are willing to take the Republican governor to task on this one.

[Phil Lilley]

This issue does not follow party lines- that's very evident.

[hank franklin]

It's a pro-life issue, and the pro-life vote is overwhelmingly Republican.

The last 2 years have seen exclusive Republican control in Missouri yet what pro-life legislation have we seen? Why not a move in the legislature to ban stem cell research?

Why not? Because the supposed "pro-life" politicians will buckle when there's money involved. The big-time GOP money people are all behind this. Last thing a GOP legislator wants is his feet held to the fire on a stem cell vote. HIs constituency likely is against it, but the GOP leadership is for it. No way in hell you'd see such a dicey political issue get to the floor.

[Wayne SW/MO]

Not following you hank, health care and cure is an expensive proposition and its not all profit that makes it so. Liability escrows, research failures that don't generate any income are just a few.

I couldn't personally look anyone in the eye that lost a chance at life or normalcy because I helped scuttle research that would help them.

In my opinion its only Pro Life if you believe fertilization is the beginning, but thats debatable.

[hank franklin]

I'm just saying it's the pro-life (or anti-abortion, if you prefer) constituency that's leading the opposition to Amendment 2.

And the pro-life vote is overwhelmingly Republican. My point is I wonder how many of the Amendment 2 opponents understand the degree of GOP support. My feeling is a lot of the rank and file Amendment 2 opponents would be surprised to know that Blunt is against them on this one.

[gonefishin]

I still say it is all about bucks.

[crappiefisherman]

I am a prolife advocate.I also know the LORD placed me on earth to make a differance in someones life.I have a family that im raising and trying to lead in the path of rightiousness.I wonder if possibly these stem cell donars and I will call them donars, have been made available to make a differance in someone elses life also.I am very happy with my beliefs and I hope all of you are on board for the trip home>AMEN

[Wayne SW/MO]

And the pro-life vote is overwhelmingly Republican.

I wouldn't argue that, but that does not mean that the party has only one interpretation of life.

I generally vote Republican, I'm pro life, at least within my personal belief of the emergence of human life, and I support the initiative.

I also don't believe that the candidate exists that will fulfill every wish of the population, but we still only have a choice between two viable candidates.