Stem Cell II: What Will Be Different This Time

In their Springfield press conference Tuesday outlining a proposal to ban the cloning of human embryos, Sen. Matt Bartle and Rep. Jim Lembke contended that a majority of Missourians came out to vote against "human cloning" this past November, but that some mistakenly voted "yes" on Amendment 2.

As Republican Roseanne Bentley points out, this debate all revolves around how you define human cloning.

In the Bartle-Lembke amendment, this is how it is defined:

"No person may clone or attempt to clone a human being. Clone a human being means to produce a human zygote, human blastocyst or human embryo by means other than the fertilization of an egg of a human female by the sperm of a human male."

But as Bentley and other pro-embryonic stem cell advocates argue, in the somatic cell nuclear transfer process, "you take a cell from a person's body such as a skin cell, and put it into an unfertilized egg, so there's no sperm there, so I don't consider that fertilized."

The Bartle-Lembke amendment would ban the somatic cell nuclear transfer process, which is sometimes referred to as "therapeutic cloning."

"Our opponents know that cloning is a loser when it comes to this issue and they don't use the word cloning anymore, in fact they want to say they're not cloning. But four years ago, when we were debating this they say we are cloning, we're cloning embryos for research purposes," Rep. Lembke said.

Rep. Lembke also pointed out that support for Amendment 2 declined as time went on.

"We really believe if the proponents had spent another $5 million and had another week, they would've lost it on their own," Rep. Lembke said. "Opinions were moving against it in the final weeks."

"The more they learn about human cloning, the more likely they are to oppose it," Bartle added.

But why go through this again when Missourians have already spoken?

"Missourians can choose to amend their constitution any time they want by a simple majority vote," Sen. Bartle said.

Bartle and Lembke have introduced legislation to ban "human cloning" before, but their bills have never even reached the floor for a vote.

What's the difference this year? First off, it's not an election year.
Secondly, "it was suppressed by leadership in both the House and the Senate," according to Lembke.

But weren't those Republican leaders, I asked?

"It was suppressed by leaders in the House and Senate," Lembke replied.

"That were Republicans," I pressed.

"If that's, yes, I guess," Lembke said.

The Missouri Coaltion for Lifesaving Cures is ramping up to pressure lawmakers to "defend the will of the people." "This is nothing more than an attempt by a few politicians to push their failed agenda of outlawing stem cell research and cures in our state," said coalition chairman Donn Rubin. "We have fought this issue on the floors of our state legislature in the past and will do so again if necessary."

Bartle and Lembke said they haven't yet circulated the proposed resolution to their colleagues, but predicted broad support, especially from lawmakers around the Ozarks, where Amendment 2 failed.

"We expect rural Democrats to hear the will of their constituents and join the effort," Bartle said.
"This time the lawmakers won't be pressured from the Governor," Lembke said, adding that there would be more pressure on the leadership to schedule a vote, because some are running for higher office.

"Many dynamics are at play this year," said Lembke (who is pictured above).

But how this battle will impact the Republican party in the future rests on the minds of many in the G.O.P.