Testimony of

NYS Conservative Party Executive Director Shaun Marie Levine on the

 Stem Cell Bond

Albany, NY –

Good Afternoon.

Thank you for giving the NYS Conservative Party the opportunity to comment on the Economic Development section of the proposed budget.  We will limit our comments to the portion that deals specifically with the Stem Cell Bond.  While we are limiting our comments to only the Stem Cell issue, our silence on the other budget areas does not mean that we are in agreement as we firmly believe that New York over taxes, over regulates business, and certainly spends far too much.

The NYS Conservative Party is not opposed to medical research that will improve the life of our citizens; we are adamantly opposed to unethical experimentation on embryonic stem cells.

The language in the bill is an affront to those of us who believe in medical research to find cures for many of the diseases and genetic shortcomings that stem cell research has provided hope to.  The very notion that the proposed Stem Cell and Innovation Fund Corporation is in the economic development portion of the budget, rather than the health and mental health budget submission is a problem.  We strongly believe that ethical stem cell research should only be considered as a way to have healthier citizens - not as a means to bring jobs to New York.  The very idea that this is in the economic development portion of the budget suggests to us that ethical research is not the priority, in fact we believe that the emphasis has been wrongly placed on luring jobs, not curing people.

If curing people, is the goal, why does the Stem Cell and Innovation Fund Corporation also contain emerging technologies including, but not limited to clean or renewable energy, new agribusiness, security technologies, wireless technologies, nanotechnology, software etc.?  Since this essentially is a “Bond Issue,” is the inclusion of emerging technologies just a ploy to sell the “Bond Idea” to the public? 

Reducing taxes, restrained spending and if overzealous regulations placed on businesses by mandates are eased, wouldn’t emerging technologies be more apt to set up shop in New York State?  Businesses have left because of the burdens placed on them by our government. Governments’ response? According to this proposal --  float a $1.5 billion bond to bring emerging technologies to New York.

We are not certain that emerging technologies will even benefit from the Stem Cell and Innovation Fund Corporation.  As one examines the bill language, it becomes clear that of the $1.5 billion to be approved by voters -  fifty percent of such funds shall be made available for stem cell and other life sciences purposes, and fifty percent of such funds shall be made available for emerging technologies purposes.  However, the limitation set forth in this provision may be nullified upon the unanimous approval of the board of directors of the corporation and the approval of the director of the budget.  In other words, all of the money can go to stem cell and other life sciences.

Ethical stem cell research offers a positive and realistic hope that the medical field will find cures to some of our most detrimental diseases and genetic shortcomings.

Any discussion on ethical stem cell research should stand-alone.

We strongly urge you to separate emerging technologies and stem cell and life sciences.  We believe that the complexities of ethical stem cell research should not be commingled with emerging technologies.

In fact, the bill calls for the establishment of two advisory councils, one for stem cell and life sciences and one for emerging technologies.  Each shall be composed of not fewer than seven and not more than fifteen members, none of whom shall be members of the corporation board or its employees.  They shall provide policy advice to the board with respect to the establishment of investment goals and scientific and economic objectives and standards.

The Board, as defined, shall be composed of fifteen voting members, thirteen of whom shall be appointed by the governor as follows:  the governor shall appoint seven; the leaders of each House shall appoint two and each minority leader shall appoint one.  The chairman of the NYS Urban Development Corporation and the Commissioner of Economic Development shall serve as ex-officio members.  (Both Gubernatorial appointments. 

Bill language indicates that board membership shall generally be representative of the fields of medical and scientific research, economic development and venture capital, and disease advocacy; it does not recommend how many shall be from each field, thereby leaving it open to be comprised of mostly economic development and venture capital experts.

We are opposed to the structure - and fiscal impact - of the proposed publicly funded corporation - completely under the control of the Governor.

By our count, the Governor will be in the position to appoint nine members.  Actions of the corporation are taken by a simple majority vote – nine members of a fifteen-member board is a simple majority and will prevail.  In matters to approve investment, loans or grants - a two-thirds majority is needed, therefore, only one of the other six board members has to agree with the Governor’s appointees to have a two-thirds majority.

It is our opinion, that allowing any Governor to have complete control of a public corporation that has incurred a debt in excess of $1.5 billion -- without accrued interest -- is poor public policy.

We strongly believe this is another reason to keep ethical stem cell research as a separate entity.

New York State is deeply in debt; a debt incurred through overspending by government officials.  When government officials believe there is a sound reason for spending, they often appeal to the emotions of the average voter in their quest for more money.  In so doing, government officials place the burden on the voter -- never curb spending -- and continue to collect more of our hard earned tax dollars, knowing that the voter will respond to the emotion, rather than the true facts of the issue.

As proposed, the corporation shall continue until there are no longer any assets or money available for distribution. 

However, the corporation is authorized to receive contributions from any governmental entity, for-profit and not-for-profit corporations, association or person for the purposes of making economic development investments for the benefit of the state of New York related to stem cell, other life sciences and emerging technologies and other corporate activities authorized pursuant to the article.

Is the contribution to the Stem Cell and Innovation Fund Corporation tax deductible as well?  Who will be encouraging donations to the Corporation?  The Board Members appointed by the Governor?  The Governor? 

So far, we have focused on the economic development portion of the proposed Stem Cell and Innovation Fund Corporation.  No issue, in modern times, stirs more passion than stem cell research.

We recognize that the proposed language states, “No funds made available to the corporation from any source shall be directly or indirectly utilized for research involving human reproductive cloning.”  The language states - no monies will involve human reproductive cloning – yet, human reproductive cloning remains undefined in the bill’s language. 

The bill does use the terminology “Stem Cell” and defines stem cell as progenitor cells and/or pluripotent cells.

According to the Nation Institute of Health[1], pluripotent stem cells are harvested from human embryos that are a few days old.  Cells from these embryos are used to create pluripotent stem cell “lines” -- cell cultures that can be grown indefinitely in the laboratory.  Pluripotent stem cell lines have also been developed from fetal tissue that is more than eight weeks into development.

Taxes collected by government, should never be used to experiment on pluripotent stem cells, harvested from human embryos.  It is morally reprehensible to consider using taxpayer money to experiment on human embryos.

Every person in this room, every one of us, was once a human embryo.  Each of us is just a human embryo that has developed and grown, to be what we are today.  Some became Senators, some Assembly Members and some just ordinary citizens like me.  What we have in common is

that no one experimented on us.  We were safe in our mother’s womb, safe to develop our hearts, lungs, limbs and brain.  From a single egg and sperm, we became who we are.

Some of us will develop cancer, heart disease or Alzheimers'.

All of us will die eventually, preferably without the ravages of the aforementioned diseases. 

All of us want to do all that we can to protect our bodies from disease and to prevent genetic birth defects.  Every one of us would do everything possible to be able to say that no child will ever be born with Autism, Cerebral Palsy, Cystic Fibrosis or any of the lesser-known abnormalities like Marfan syndrome.  Every one of us would do everything possible to help paraplegics walk, to reverse the effects of a stroke, to never see a parent suffering and eventually dying from bone cancer.

But will we -- should we -- take a human embryo -- to experiment on -- when there are alternatives?

Stem cell research began in the 1960’s in Canada and made headlines in 1998, when researchers at the University of Wisconsin and John Hopkins University isolated human embryonic stem cells.  The controversy has continued and will continue because the ends do not justify the means.

Not one cure, nothing, not one person has been helped by embryonic stem cell research since it made headlines in 1998.  Nothing has been accomplished, but we constantly hear the need for government money.  Even James Thomson, the veterinary doctor credited with the isolation of the first embryonic stem cell, stated earlier this month, that obstacles include learning how to grow the cells into all types of organs and tissue and then making sure cancer and other defects are not introduced during the transplantation.  Major roadblocks remain before human embryonic stem cells can be transplanted into humans to cure diseases or replace injured body parts.  Thomson told the Wisconsin Newspaper Association’s annual convention “Ultimately, those transplantation therapies should (emphasis added) work, but it’s likely to take a long time.”[2]  Note -- he did not state “will” work.

On the other hand, ethical stem cell research has made tremendous strides.  According to the website “Do No Harm:  The Coalition of Americans for Research Ethics” adult stem cell research has benefited seventy-two different health problems:  Cancers, Cardiovascular, Liver and Bladder Disease, Auto-Immune Disease, Neural Degenerative Disease.  (Click here for an up to date list:  http://www.stemcellresearch.org/facts/treatments.htm)

Just this past January Charles Krauthammer, a strong supporter of legal abortion and a person who does not believe that life begins at conception, a self-described secularly inclined person, wrote in his column --  that amongst people who think like him -- there is great trepidation about the inherent dangers of wanton and unrestricted manipulation of human embryos.  To quote Dr. Krauthammer “Once we have taken the position, of many stem cell research advocates, that embryos are discardable tissue with no more intrinsic value that a hangnail or an appendix, then all barriers are down.  What is to prevent us from producing not just tissues and organs but humanlike organisms for preservation as a source of future body parts on demand?[3]”

Europe is far ahead of us in experimenting on human embryos; it is interesting to note that Germany, worried about a slippery slope toward unethical human experimentation, has already prohibited some types of stem cell research.

The United Kingdom, China, Korea and Singapore, have set out to become the epicenter of stem cell research, by providing government money.  At the present time, the Human Fertility and Embryology Authority (HFEA), the government regulator in the UK, can only accept eggs donated for scientific research ~ if they are a byproduct of IVF treatment or sterilization.  This is about to change dramatically.  HFEA’s Ethics and Law Committee recommends that women be paid $327.50 -- the US equivalent of 250 Euros -- plus travel expenses for their eggs due to the chronic shortage of eggs for scientific use.

Donna Dickenson, emeritus professor of medical ethics and humanities at the University of London and Britains' leading expert on the issue, upon being told of this development stated, “The sum of 250 Euros would still be enough of an inducement for women of eastern Europe, for example, to come to Britain to sell their eggs.  That’s clearly turning eggs into an object of trade and that’s disturbing.” [4]

We know from these published reports, that the slippery slope has begun in Europe and we must do all that we can to prevent that from happening here.

We believe that a line must be drawn in the sand and embryonic stem cell research must be the line.

Adult stem cells, amniotic fluid, baby teeth, umbilical cord blood -- there is reason to hope with the advances made in these areas.  New Yorkers can be at the forefront of research – if we choose to make it the right research and concentrate on the positive aspects of ethical stem cell research.  We need to stay focused on the medical aspect, not the economic aspect, we must pursue ethical research and we must understand to experiment on pluripotent stem cells dehumanizes the possible good by turning the cells into commodities, resources to be calculated and consumed, degraded before being destroyed. 

The Conservative Party of New York State believes that there is a bright future in the medical field of ethical stem cell research.  We believe that government will play a role and more importantly should play a role in making it possible to cure or prevent many of the painful, heart wrenching health problems faced by ordinary people.  We believe that medical miracles have occurred and will continue -- as long as we respect what we all began as – the human embryo.

Thank you.