Profiles

Shadi: Congresswoman DeGette, Thank you for the opportunity to talk with you. I would like to ask you initially how you became interested in stem cell research and came to support it.

Congresswoman DeGette: I am the co-chair of the Diabetes Caucus in Congress which is the largest caucus in Congress. About five years ago, I was talking to some researchers and they were telling me about the potential of embryonic stem cell research for curing type-1 diabetes. That spurred my interest and I started working on issues then. In the spring prior to August 2001, when President Bush's administration was considering their position, I was talking to the coalition in the Congress about supporting stem cell research.

Shadi: I would like to ask you about H.R.810. which of course was passed in the House in May this year and you co-sponsored it with Congressman Mike Castle (R-DE).

Congresswoman DeGette: Yes, actually I wrote the bill. From my experience in the spring of 2001 working with the coalition which, by the way, was a bi-partisan coalition, and then with the President making the executive order which said that you could not use federal money for research on cells before 2001 (stem cells derived and isolated after August 2001), I continually monitored what was happening with the government and research on those cell lines and I spent a lot of time talking to the research community and other groups.

It was the Spring before 2004 election when I became convinced that the President's policy was not working. It was driving research overseas. It was driving research into private hands and it was adversely impacting the NIH's (National Institutes of Health) ability to be the chief engine behind stem cell research. So that spring, I put together another coalition. Many of them were the same people from 2001, and we put together a letter to President Bush asking him to rescind his previous policy, and we started working on the legislation. I actually recruited Congressman Mike Castle (R-DE) who is a wonderful moderate Republican from Delaware to help me with this effort—because he is well respected on both sides of the aisle, a hard worker and able to pass legislation. So we (my staff and I) developed the bill; then, we brought Mike in and decided that Mike would be the lead person on the bill because he is a Republican and the Republicans control the House. The main thing we wanted was to make sure the bill would pass.

We also decided not to try and push the legislation before the 2004 election, because we felt that if we did, a lot of moderate and even conservative Republicans who wanted to vote for the bill would instead vote against it because of the elections to support the party and President Bush. We basically educated the people, raised awareness, introduced the bill, got co-sponsors, and waited until January 2005. We then put all the other important groups together. All the advocacy groups were really very important to all of this: including The American Juvenile Diabetes Association, The Alzheimer's Disease Association, Parkinson's Disease advocacy groups, and Christopher Reeves Paralysis Foundation.

Shadi: I would appreciate it if you would give us a picture of the happenings, politics, and the lobbying behind the bill. Obviously you had a lot of opposition in the House.

Congresswoman DeGette: What happened was that when we developed the legislation, we developed it in a coalition. I think we had 200 groups supporting this bill. It was everybody from the League of Women Voters to the research advocacy groups. It was a very impressive list. We still knew that it would be difficult to pass the bill, because we knew the right to life group would oppose the bill. I think the most effective lobbying groups in the Congress are the same ones as in state legislatures: the National Rifle Association (NRA), and the right to life group, the Christian Coalition.

So we knew if we wanted to overcome that, we would really need to get some strong pressure put on. As the result, all these groups did a wonderful job mobilizing their grassroots supporters to call in their members of the Congress. Also 70% of the American public supports embryonic stem cell research including a majority of self-identified pro-life Republican voters. So we got that information out.

I also think what happened was that the Christian Coalition just assumed that since Congressman Tom Delay opposed the bill it would not come up. So, they did not really lobby until about two to three weeks before the bill came up. What we did all through the spring of 2005, Congressman Mike Castle and I, was putting together a bipartisan “whip” task force: Five Democrats and five Republicans. We met together, and basically whipped the members of the Congress–meaning that we tried to persuade them to our view.

Two or three weeks before the vote, we knew exactly where our votes were. We knew who was going to vote yes, who was going to vote no and all those in-between. So, suddenly, when the House leadership agreed to bring the bill for a vote, the Christian Coalition was caught flat-footed, and that's why so many people opposed the bill.

We had 238 votes and we thought that we had some where between 230-245 votes, so we were really very close. It was good. The reason that the House leadership agreed to bring the bill up for a vote is that Mike Castle said that the moderate Republicans were not going to vote for a number of legislative initiatives of the leadership if they didn't bring the bill for a vote. I also told them that I was going to put the bill as an amendment to any bill. I am on the House Subcommittee on Health which oversees NIH, for example. We just said that we were going to be your worse nightmare if you don't bring the bill up for a vote.

Shadi: The bill has gone to the Senate. Do you think it will pass in the Senate?

Congresswoman DeGette: I do think that it will pass in the Senate. We have a strong Coalition in the Senate. We have Senator Orrin Hatch (R-UT), Senator Tom Harkin (D-IA), Senator Arlen Specter (R-PA), Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), Senator Ted Kennedy (D-MA), and Senator Gordon Smith (R-OR). So, we have a very strong bipartisan coalition in the Senate. Right before the August recess, Senator Bill Frist (R-TN, Senate majority leader) said that he will support the bill. That is obviously important and significant because he is a leader in the Senate. But of course we are now in October and we have had Hurricane Katrina and two Supreme Court vacancies. So the Senate has been very busy with all of that.

I think what we are going to do is wait until right after the beginning of next year, and then make an all out effort. What we have to guard against is that the Christian Coalition is trying to get the leadership to put up 4-5 so-called alternative bills. Some of these alternative bills are really not alternative. For example, one is (based on) someone's idea to isolate embryonic stem cells without destroying the embryo, but the bill is not based on science. It is really based on politics. We will really have to get the debate focused again.

Shadi: President Bush has said that he will veto the bill if it passes the Senate.

Congresswoman DeGette: Maybe he will veto it. But for him to veto something which will have the potential to help the lives of 110 million Americans, I think it does not make any sense.

Shadi: So, you don't think that he will actually veto it.

Congresswoman DeGette: That is what he has said, and I have to take him at his word.

Shadi: One of the things that people talk about are the advances in research made in other countries. For example, the latest development this past summer from South Korea . I keep hearing it in the halls of science and I am sure you hear it. How do you think the politics in this country is affecting the science? Are we now behind other countries?

Congresswoman DeGette: We are. Actually this is a very persuasive argument for many policymakers, because a lot of research went offshore. What we need to realize, number one, is that there is nothing like NIH any where in the world and its ability to fund and support the research. We are really losing our advantage in this research around the world. And, number two, not only in South Korea but also in other parts of the world, there are no ethical guarantees as to how this research will be conducted. So, we believe that it is an important part of our bill that there will be ethical guidelines put in place. People are surprised when they hear that President Bush's policy has no ethical guidelines.

Shadi: This is interesting because I was going to ask you about this subject. For example, when I give talks, a point, which I bring up all the time and I explain to people, is that countries like United Kingdom , Australia have a central organization, a body which regulates things related to stem cell research. But we don't. What is your position and how could we create a body like that?

Congresswoman DeGette: That's right. We have a mechanism now where the NIH can issue guidelines for how this research would be conducted. That is an important part of our legislation. We also spell out that we would only be using embryos from the In-Vitro fertilization (IVF) clinics which are supposed to be discarded. There is informed consent and embryos can not be bought or sold. We already have some controls in the bill and then we allow NIH to add other controls. I think this is very important because this type of research holds great promise but it is very experimental ethically so we need to think about ethical issues.

Shadi: Let me address a point which many scientists make. We are all very much in favor and in support of your bill and other similar bills which will create a less restrictive environment for research. But your bill does not go far enough. It is great but it does not mention somatic cell nuclear transfer or SCNT. What is your response to those comments and criticisms ?

Congresswoman DeGette: I think this bill when it passes will be the first milestone on the road towards ethical scientific stem cell research. There is another bill which I am co-sponsoring with Congresswoman Mary Bono (R-CA). I am very much in support of SCNT. The reason we did not put it in this bill is that very simply we can not pass it. We have had several bills these past few years that Congressman Weldon (R-FL), a conservative from Florida , has sponsored. His bills ban both human reproductive cloning and SCNT. I actually sponsored an amendment for several years with former Congressman Jim Greenwood (R-PA), which was to take out SCNT from those bills, but it would not pass.

But now that I have experience with the passage of H.R.810., we have a blue print, which is quite unusual in the House to have a blueprint. Now we will go back to those same people to educate them about SCNT. There is also a similar controversy in the senate about SCNT. People need education and to understand that no body supports human reproductive cloning (human cloning) and they need to understand the science.

Shadi: And that is again what we were talking about. Since we do not have a central body which says look it is illegal to clone humans and it is legal to do these other things for research. I believe it makes it difficult for people to understand.

Congresswoman DeGette: Right, there is no law at all. We have had some hearings in my committee. There are some people who are trying to do human reproductive cloning and that is quite frightening. But right now we can not pass a bill on cloning without inadvertently banning SCNT, so we are now at a standstill.

Shadi: You mentioned education. Obviously, public education is quite important. Do you think the policy makers in Washington DC are educated enough on stem cell research? And who does the educating?

Congresswoman DeGette: A lot of it is being done by me (she laughs). I mean a lot of the way we passed this bill was by going to individual House members and explaining to them what embryonic stem cell research is. I would say in the last four years, the knowledge among the Congress members has gone up exponentially. Initially, when we started out they did not know what the research was about. They thought it was related to abortion. They thought it had something to do with fetuses. Now I think most members know what it is. So the knowledge has gone up. I also thing the education and knowledge among the citizens has gone up exponentially too. I can guarantee that most politicians still do not know what SCNT is. I was just recently talking to a very bright, well respected member of Congress and I had to go through every step and explain what these procedures are. And I always laugh because I do not have medical or science background. I am a lawyer, and have no scientific training.

Shadi: And you have found that people are receptive?

Congresswoman DeGette: Oh, yes—especially because the research has been shown to have so much promise.

Shadi: How about the other members of the House? You obviously had over 190 members of the House who were against your bill. Are you going to those who actually said no to your last bill, especially for the new bills you are talking about?

Congresswoman DeGette: Yes, it is interesting that there are some people who voted no on the H.R.810., who I think could vote yes on the SCNT bill. They just do not know what it is. So I am talking to those people now. But what is interesting is that some people, who object to destruction of embryos for the isolation of stem cells, have no objections to SCNT, because it does not involve sperm and an egg. So that is an interesting debate. But of the 190 so people who voted against, it was because they thought it would hurt their re-election chances. They just felt that they did not want to deal with that. I have had several members who have come to me and said you know I am sorry I voted against that bill. And, I say, you probably have the opportunity again because it will come back. It is just like anything else. When we started having IVF clinics many members opposed IVF clinics, but now it is not an issue. So as people are educated it will change. I always say: as the public will lead, the leaders will follow. This is the case here. There is great support among the public.

Shadi: Obviously, You represent the state and people of Colorado . You are from Denver . What have you heard from people in Colorado and your constituency?

Congresswoman DeGette: People are so happy that I am doing this legislation. People stop me on the street to tell me how happy they are, which is very gratifying. They have not done a poll in Colorado . But I bet if they do, I would imagine the support would be over 70%.

Shadi: Yes, I wouldn't be surprised if it's even higher.

Shadi: Let me ask the question in broader terms. I give talks at churches and see the opposition. How could we as a society come to some kind of agreement, a “common ground”, where we agree about the research and the extent of what we allow here so we could benefit from stem cell research?

Congresswoman DeGette: Well, I think people need to think about science in a scientific way. When we had the debate about our bill on the floor, Congressman Tom Delay (R-TX) was debating against me and talking about babies being dismembered. I think that is just appalling. That is just simply not true. Because, that is distortion of the truth. Tom Delay may actually believe that, but that is just putting politics and emotion before science. I think that, there are some things some scientists may want to do which would be ethically inappropriate but we need to debate it on common ground. I think about how far we could go, if the members of Congress and society talk from common understanding.

As we go forward, the ethical issues in science and research will only get more challenging. That is why we should all take a step back as a society and say lets figure out how we can get some kind of consensus. I think the irony about embryonic stem cell research is that we are coming to a societal consensus. And that consensus is that we support it. Now the political leaders have to understand that they are not just elected to represent a small group of vocal opponents, but they are elected to represent the majority in the society.

Shadi: It is so great to hear this. I don't remember ever hearing this before.

Congresswoman DeGette: No, I think that's true. I really think that the voters are much smarter than we give them credit. Honestly, I did not make this a partisan issue during the last election, and I really had an opportunity to do that. If they don't give us the vote and they continue to want to have it both ways, then this will be an issue during the next election. People will ask the question that why are we voting for people who are only representing a small group in our society.

Shadi: Congresswoman, thank you so much for your time. This has been a pleasure to talk with you.