Editorial Pages Criticize Bush's Stem Cell Stance

The New York Times and Washington Post editorial pages weighed in today on the stem cell debate, as Congress awaits a promised veto from President Bush on a bill (S.5) that would expand federal funding for stem cell research. The NYT editorial pointed out a real-life example of how this funding rule is really messing up some scientists' work:

The restrictions on federal financing have led to absurdly complicated and costly maneuvers. Scientists are forced to buy extra equipment and laboratory space with private money to perform off-limits research while using equipment and supplies bought with federal money on the permitted stem cell research. In a shocking example cited during Senate debate, a California researcher who had been cultivating stem cells in a makeshift privately financed lab suffered a power failure but was unable to transfer her lines into industrial-strength freezers in another lab because they were federally financed. Two years of work melted away because of this inanity.

The Post editorial also supports the bill -- which did I mention would expand federal funding only to surplus embryos at fertility clinics, with informed consent from the parents, and that would otherwise be discarded? We're not talking about going nuts here, throwing money at unregulated research. Federally-funded embryonic stem cell research in the United States would still be quite limited. But instead it will be practically non-existent because of President Bush's stubborn policy.