Groups File Separate Lawsuits Challenging Ballot Summary Of Proposal To Modify Missouri Amendment Protecting Embryonic Stem Cell Research
The Missouri Stem Cell Research and Cures Initiative, which was approved by Missouri voters in November 2006, ensures that stem cell research permitted under federal law is protected in the state and prohibits human cloning. It also allows stem cell research that involves somatic cell nuclear transfer, which some opponents consider a type of human cloning. Somatic cell nuclear transfer is conducted by inserting the genetic material from a patient's cell -- usually from a skin cell -- into an unfertilized egg from another person. The patient's genetic material incorporates into the egg and causes it to develop into an embryo that is a genetic match to the skin cell patient.
Cures Without Cloning in August filed a ballot proposal with Carnahan for the November 2008 election that would create a new definition of cloning to ban somatic cell nuclear transfer and bar tax dollars from funding research using techniques prohibited by the definition. The ballot summary says the proposal would "repeal the current ban on human cloning" and "limit patients' access to stem cell research, therapies and cures approved by voters in November 2006" by redefining the cloning ban to criminalize some procedures that currently are allowed (Kaiser Daily Women's Health Policy Report, 10/12). Lawsuits, Reaction
Cures Without Cloning's lawsuit asks the court to rule Carnahan's summary invalid and replace it on the ballot with new language proposed by the group. The group's petition said that the ballot summary "reflects the secretary of state's bias and prejudice against the Cures Without Cloning amendment, and concomitant favoritism toward proponents of human (embryonic) cloning and stem cell research on human embryos." Carnahan refuted the group's statements. "It is our legal obligation to make sure that Missouri voters always have a fair, accurate and concise summary of what they are voting on -- regardless of the issue," Carnahan said in a statement, adding that the summary is "fair, accurate and reflects how the constitution would be changed by this initiative if it got on the ballot and was passed" (Kansas City Business Journal, 10/22).
Meanwhile, MCLC's lawsuit, filed by plaintiffs Robert Pund and Susan Baier, claims that the fiscal note summary underestimates the proposal's potential cost to taxpayers, the AP/Tribune reports. Montee's summary says that the proposal "could have a significant negative fiscal impact on state and local governmental entities due to its prohibition of certain research activities" but adds that actual costs are unknown. MCLC said the summary should state that at least $200 million in state funding and at least $25 million in local government funding would be lost if the proposal passes (AP/Columbia Tribune, 10/20). Cures Without Cloning's suit also challenges Montee's summary, but its petition states that "the only fair statement the auditor can make is that the fiscal impact on state and local government is unknown" (Kansas City Business Journal, 10/22).
Reprinted with kind permission from http://www.kaisernetwork.org. You can view the entire Kaiser Daily Health Policy Report, search the archives, or sign up for email delivery at http://www.kaisernetwork.org/dailyreports/healthpolicy. The Kaiser Daily Health Policy Report is published for kaisernetwork.org, a free service of The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation© 2005 Advisory Board Company and Kaiser Family Foundation. All rights reserved.
Grupuri de fiºiere separate Procese provocator Ballot Rezumatul propuneri de modificare a Missouri Amendamentul Protejarea celule stem embrionare de cercetare - Groups File Separate Lawsuits Challenging Ballot Summary Of Proposal To Modify Missouri Amendment Protecting Embryonic Stem Cell Research - articole medicale engleza - startsanatate