Should Pres. Bush veto stem cell bill? What would you do?
from 
JoeUser Forums
JoeUser Forums
In case you've been under a rock, or have just ignored the topic in general (hey, one of the biggest threads on the topic was from our favority Clueless Old Liberal, so I don't blame you if you did ignore it), with the passage in the House of Representatives of a bill that encourages stem cell research, President Bush has threatened to make use of his veto powers for the first time in his presidency.
Never mind that it is fairly unusual that a President would not have ever vetoed a bill during his first term (which, logically has been the case now because Republicans control both the Senate and House, and have primarily worked in conjuction with the President, rather than going off in their own direction, as they have in the case of this bill). The President is clearly threatening to veto the new stem cell bill that has come up in the House and may be passed in the Senate (though that is not a given at this point).
For a news reference on the issue, see the following article from CNN.com:
Bush threatens veto on stem cell research bill
(CNN) -- President Bush on Friday threatened to veto a bill expanding public funding for embryonic stem cell research that could make it to his desk by early next week.
"I made [it] very clear to the Congress that the use of federal money, taxpayers' money, to promote science which destroys life in order to save life, I'm against that," Bush told reporters. "Therefore if the bill does that, I will veto it."
It would mark the first veto of Bush's presidency.
Supporters of the bill dispute Bush's depiction of the research, saying it's critical to advance scientific discoveries that may help cure diseases.
The bill would broaden the limits on funding embryonic stem cell research beyond the strict rules the president outlined four years ago.
Bush limited funding for research on human embryonic stem cells to cell lines already in existence at that time.
Bush aides have said they're concerned the measure still may pass the GOP-led Congress by a veto-proof margin. They're working to convince enough Republicans to support the president.
In the House of Representatives, 290 votes are needed to override a veto.
Note that the House bill passed on a vote of 238-194 -- far less than the two-thirds support that would be needed to override a veto.
Nows the time for JoeUser's and JillUser's to speak up on the issue.
Should the President veto the legislation?
Should Congress over-ride the veto and expand the research as suggested in the House bill?
If you faced the choice that the President has made, what would you have done?
Finally, to throw a monkey wrench into the discussion, lets say you have a friend or relative that has Alzheimers, or Parkinson's Disease. Would it change your convictions at all, knowing that perhaps the research would help lead to a cure or treatment for your friend or relative, or would you stick by your convictions regardless?
Never mind that it is fairly unusual that a President would not have ever vetoed a bill during his first term (which, logically has been the case now because Republicans control both the Senate and House, and have primarily worked in conjuction with the President, rather than going off in their own direction, as they have in the case of this bill). The President is clearly threatening to veto the new stem cell bill that has come up in the House and may be passed in the Senate (though that is not a given at this point).
For a news reference on the issue, see the following article from CNN.com:
Bush threatens veto on stem cell research bill
(CNN) -- President Bush on Friday threatened to veto a bill expanding public funding for embryonic stem cell research that could make it to his desk by early next week.
"I made [it] very clear to the Congress that the use of federal money, taxpayers' money, to promote science which destroys life in order to save life, I'm against that," Bush told reporters. "Therefore if the bill does that, I will veto it."
It would mark the first veto of Bush's presidency.
Supporters of the bill dispute Bush's depiction of the research, saying it's critical to advance scientific discoveries that may help cure diseases.
The bill would broaden the limits on funding embryonic stem cell research beyond the strict rules the president outlined four years ago.
Bush limited funding for research on human embryonic stem cells to cell lines already in existence at that time.
Bush aides have said they're concerned the measure still may pass the GOP-led Congress by a veto-proof margin. They're working to convince enough Republicans to support the president.
In the House of Representatives, 290 votes are needed to override a veto.
Note that the House bill passed on a vote of 238-194 -- far less than the two-thirds support that would be needed to override a veto.
Nows the time for JoeUser's and JillUser's to speak up on the issue.
Should the President veto the legislation?
Should Congress over-ride the veto and expand the research as suggested in the House bill?
If you faced the choice that the President has made, what would you have done?
Finally, to throw a monkey wrench into the discussion, lets say you have a friend or relative that has Alzheimers, or Parkinson's Disease. Would it change your convictions at all, knowing that perhaps the research would help lead to a cure or treatment for your friend or relative, or would you stick by your convictions regardless?
