Kansas Coalition
for Lifesaving Cures
PO Box 394
Topeka KS 66601-0394
Toll-free: 800-821-2658
Email: info@kansascures.com
| NEWS ARTICLE May 11, 2006 By David Klepper, Topeka Correspondent The Kansas City Star |
Kansas lawmakers remove research ban
form panel to explore subject
Stem-cell plan dies; issue doesn’t
Despite deal, sides gear up for debate
TOPEKA — A proposed ban on state-funded stem-cell research is dead for now, but indications are that the debate is just getting started in Kansas.
A compromise reached in the final hours of the 2006 legislative session removed the proposed ban from the state budget but called for a special legislative panel to examine the issues surrounding stem-cell research.
In the short term, it’s a victory for those who say a ban could hurt a broad range of research and the state’s efforts to lure bioscience investment. But the real debate will probably begin when the committee starts its work.
Conservative lawmakers and anti-abortion groups pushed to pass a budget provision outlawing the use of state dollars for stem-cell research, but Senate leaders objected. The compromise wasn’t reached until the final hours of the 2006 session Wednesday.
Kansas has avoided the full-scale stem-cell debate seen in Missouri. But as in Jefferson City, lawmakers in Topeka are divided between those who want to spur research and economic development and those who believe it’s unethical to tamper with life’s building blocks.
“The decision is fraught with so many ethical questions,” said Rep. Lance Kinzer, an Olathe Republican who pushed for the ban on state-funded research. He would like to see a total ban on early stem-cell research.
But researchers like those at Kansas City’s Stowers Institute for Medical Research say the ban would hurt vital research into cures for disease.
“Anti-science legislation, particularly legislation that rules out certain kinds of research, would be devastating to our ability to recruit and retain the best researchers,” said William Neaves, CEO and president of the institute.
And those researchers have supporters in state government, who see bioscience as an attractive economic development goal that could also yield cures for devastating diseases like cancer, Parkinson’s disease and others.
“I’m just hopeful that we don’t do anything to discourage science research from moving forward,” said Gov. Kathleen Sebelius, who recently attended a bioscience trade conference in Chicago.
Several states have laws that range from outright bans on any research to bans on state-funded research to bans on cloning when it is used to start a pregnancy. Missouri prohibits early stem-cell researchers from receiving state bioscience grants.
Before any ban is discussed in Kansas, lawmakers say, they want to better understand the esoteric medical terms used by both sides. Coming to grips with the terminology will probably be the committee’s first goal.
No one in the debate advocates research into reproductive cloning, in which cloned humans are birthed, but opponents of Kinzer’s measure say the definitions included in the bill could apply to the production of drugs for heart attacks, kidney disease and diabetes.
“They need to slow down and think about what they’re doing here,” said Lori Hutfles, director of the Kansas Coalition for Life Saving Cures, a group started last year to advocate stem-cell research. “It needs to have serious study and serious debate.”
Anti-abortion groups, which support a research ban, accused lawmakers who argued against the ban of caving in to research companies. Mary Kay Culp, director of Kansans for Life, called the compromise “ridiculous.”
The committee will include lawmakers from both parties in the House and Senate. Senate Vice President John Vratil, a Leawood Republican who opposes a ban, said he worries that the House, led by conservatives, will appoint members who are proponents of a ban, forcing the Senate to appoint critics of a ban, ensuring lively debate but uncertain results.
“The results would likely be of no benefit,” he said.