Last night, I conducted a telephone townhall meeting with citizens in Cobb County.  It was a lively discussion that last about 90 minutes. Some of the topics raised were: the economy, the war in Iraq and our greater War on Terror, reimbursement rates for the disabled, veteran healthcare, immigration and border security, the Fair Tax, violence on TV and traditional values.

I greatly enjoy these tele-townhall meetings, because they’re a wonderful way for me to talk with the folks back home when I’m in Washington.  So far this year, I’ve placed calls to citizens in Paulding, Gordon, Cobb, Haralson, Polk, Chattooga, Floyd, Bartow and Carroll counties. If you haven’t gotten a call yet, you likely will in the upcoming months.

The Hill newspaper today reports that Speaker Nancy Pelosi is proud of her liberal, left-wing credentials… and is trying to move the House in that direction, too: 

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) is working hard to make sure that the fiery liberal wing of the Democratic Party remembers that she is one of them. She is also going out of her way to reassure opponents of the war that she is on their side.

Her efforts are taking place in speeches and interviews off Capitol Hill and away from the constraints and compromises inherent in running the House. Liberal lawmakers and activists accuse Pelosi of being too cautious.

…To reassure the Democratic base, Pelosi has sharpened her rhetoric.

Speaking last week to the liberal pressure group Campaign for America’s Future, she repeated her previous comments that the Iraq war was a “grotesque mistake” and a “tragedy.”

In an interview with MyDD.com, a liberal blog, she called the Iraq war supplemental spending bill “weak” and reminded netroots activists that she opposed the bill. She said that the next measure would include “timelines, timelines, timelines” to end the war in Iraq.

The Speaker’s rhetoric may win applause in liberal San Francisco, but it sure dosen’t make sense in Georgia. Click HERE to read the complete article, and prepare to be stunned.

Today, Republican Study Committee (RSC) Chairman Jeb Hensarling of Texas delivered a radio address to discuss the importance of an open and accountable earmark system.  Phil is a proud member of the fiscally- and socially-conservative RSC, and supports the Chairman’s remarks. You can listen to the radio address by clicking HERE.  Below are some exerts:

[Y]ou know what earmarks are. They are things like the bridge to nowhere, the teapot museum, the indoor rainforest.  Although there are good earmarks out there, all too often they can represent a waste of your money.  Now in the last Congress, Republicans woke up.  We tried to reform this process.  We wanted to bring transparency and accountability into this process that too often has seen individual pork projects come out of your smokehouse. 

Democrats campaigned as part of the ‘06 election on the fact that they would somehow clean up this process.  They promised to have the most open and transparent process, and instead they have come up with the most secretive and untransparent process.  What they are going to do now is they are going to take these earmarks and they are going to give one person, one person, Chairman David Obey of Wisconsin, the power to decide whether or not your hard earned money ought to be used on these congressional earmarks.  He’s the one who is going to decide whether they pass the smell test, the laugh test, much less the fiscal accountability test.  That is just wrong.  That is arrogant.  That is completely contrary to what the Democrats told the American people. 

What Republicans want to do is bring in the disinfectant of sunshine.  We want the American people to know about these earmark requests.  We want your elected representatives to have the opportunity to challenge these in floor debate in the House of Representatives.  We want your elected representative to have the opportunity to strike these earmarks from pieces of legislation on the House floor.  And that’s what the fight is all about in Washington DC. 

Now although earmarks may be a small portion of the federal budget, many of us believe that, unfortunately, they are a large portion of the culture of spending that takes place in Washington DC.  Republicans want to try to protect the family budget from the federal budget and that’s why we are fighting hard against the Democrats this week; to make sure that when it comes to the spending of your hard earned money that we have transparency and accountability in the earmark process. 

Click HERE to read more about Rep. Hensarling and the RSC.

As reported earlier today (see below), the Democrat leadership has announced its intention to secretly insert earmarks into appropriations bills after the bills have been considered and voted on the House floor.  Phil sharply criticized Democrat leaders for refusing to make earmarks public:

“Democrats are arguing secretive earmarks make the process more open and ethical.  What twisted logic!  Doling out earmarks behind closed doors – without any public scrutiny - isn’t open and ethical; it’s convoluted and irresponsible.  Speaker Pelosi wants projects like the ‘Bridge to Nowhere’ tucked into legislation by the dark of night, so no one can object to potential misuse of taxpayer dollars.  While this may serve the interests of her caucus, it doesn’t serve the interests of our citizens.  The merit of an earmark should be a matter of public discourse, not backroom wheeling and dealing.”

A little background: Congress debated the first of 12 appropriation bills today without any opportunity to discuss the merits of a single earmark.  This change in policy not only reverses years of Republican commitment to an open earmark process, it violates House rules that state a list of earmarks must be published along with the correlating appropriations bill.

This week, the House begins debate on its annual appropriations bills. But unlike in past years, this time around all earmarks will be added in secret after the debate – keeping the American people in the dark about how their tax dollars are being spent.

CNN’s Jack Cafferty aptly noted last week:

“Remember when the Democrats took control of the Congress back in January? On their very first day in power they approved rules to clearly identify so-called pet projects or ‘earmarks’ in spending bills. You know, part of their promise to bring openness and transparency to government. Well, guess what? The Associated Press reports Democrats are not including the spending requests and legislation as it’s being written. Instead, they are following an order from the House Appropriations Committee Chairman, David Obey, to keep the bills free of these earmarks until the fall. Now by doing this, nobody will know what the earmarks are when the bills are first voted on in June. And when they’re finally announced in the fall, well, then, it will be virtually too late to do anything about them. Clever, don’t you think?”

Incredulous, no? After promising the most open Congress in history, the new Democrat leadership has shown its true colors. Earmarks will be dolled out behind closed doors, preventing Members of Congress from debating their merits on the House floor. Stay tuned for much more on this irresponsible and hypocritical plan.

Here’s a fact: A recent survey shows more than 60% of Americans don’t support spending taxpayer dollars on embryonic stem cell research that destroys human life.

And here’s another fact: The Caste-DeGette legislation Congress will vote on today does just that.

It’s not often in politics that you can make everyone happy, but we have a rare chance to do that on the issue of stem cell research.  We can appease the half that wants to fund the most promising stem cell research at any cost, and the half that wants to fund it while also respecting the sanctity of life. We can meet the scientific and medical need for stem cell research and maintain the ethical standards that have always driven American research. 

How you might ask? By passing legislation that funds non-destructive stem cell research.

I hope all my readers understand a few important facts about this debate, facts that are often lost in the political rhetoric that surrounds stem cell research. 

Fact one: promising research – indeed cures – have been developed from adult stem cells and umbilical cord blood.  Neither of these techniques sacrifice life for science.

Fact two: scientists are very close to deriving embryonic and embryonic-like stem cells without destroying human embryos.  I have introduced legislation to fund this ethical research, and you can learn more about that bill by clicking HERE.

Fact three: between state governments and the private sector there is nearly $4 billion committed to embryonic stem cell research over the next 10 years.  That’s right: Congress is not debating whether or not embryonic stem cell research is legal in this country, but rather whether it should be federally funded.

The bill Congress is debating today is a grave misuse of taxpayer dollars, and the American people should know that science has given us ways to avoid this ethical dilemma all together.  Sadly, it appears science has moved much faster than our government, so we’re debating outdated legislation for destructive research when far better alternatives exist.

As a pro-life OB-GYN physician, I am imploring my colleagues to look at the research, study the facts, and understand that we don’t have to sacrifice human embryos – human life! – to further science.

I’ll post more on this debate throughout the day.

Later this week, the House is expected to vote on the Conference Report for the Democrats’ FY2008 budget.  Hold on to your wallets, because if this bill passes, it will amount to the second largest tax hike in U.S. history – increasing taxes by at least $217 billion by 2012.  The House Budget Committee provides the following details, each more ominous than the last:

- The agreement includes a tax hike of at least $217 billion by fiscal year 2012.

- This includes increases in marginal rates, capital gains rates, dividends taxes, and others.

- It also includes an additional “trigger” tax hike:  If surpluses do not materialize – i.e. Congress spends too much – a tax hike “trigger” will automatically raise taxes even higher

- This would raise the Democrats’ tax increase right back to the House-passed $400 billion – the largest tax hike in American history.

- The bill provides only a minimal one-year patch for the mounting Alternative Minimum Tax crisis.

Stay tuned to see how the debate plays out in Congress – will the forces of big government trump the needs of American taxpayers?  We hope not… but we’ll wait and see.

The fight to uphold the sanctity of life is tremendously important.  As a pro-life OB-GYN physician, I know that life is held in each embryo, and I see it as my duty to help protect these most innocent among us.

Three weeks ago, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld a Congressionally-passed ban on a gruesome procedure known as partial-birth abortion. I want to take a moment to recognize a former member of the U.S. House of Representatives, Mr. Henry Hyde of Illinois, as it was his unwavering dedication that is largely responsible for this ban. 

Henry brought an unmatched passion and conviction to the pro-life movement.  Whether preventing U.S. tax dollars from being spent on abortions, or protecting our foreign aid dollars from funding these procedures, his leadership allowed dignity to shine and our government to better support life at every stage. In fact, there are countless lives that have been saved by his tireless efforts.

Chairman Hyde once noted:

 “This is not a debate about religious doctrine or even about public policy options. It is a debate about our understanding of human dignity, what it means to be a member of the human family, even thought tiny, powerless and unwanted.” 

I hope we all reflect on these words and what they say about humanity.

President Bush today made some poignant remarks in honor of the National Day of Prayer:

We pray for many reasons. First, we pray to give thanks for the blessings the Almighty has bestowed upon us…

Second, we pray for the strength to follow God’s will in our lives, and for forgiveness when we fail to do so. Through prayer, each of us is reminded that we are fallen creatures in need of mercy, and in seeking the mercy and compassion of a loving God, we grow in mercy and compassion ourselves…

Third, we pray to acknowledge God’s sovereignty in our lives and our complete dependence on Him. This is probably the toughest prayer of all, particularly for those of us in politics. In the humility of prayer we recognize the limits of human strength and human wisdom. We seek the strength and wisdom that comes from above….

Finally, we pray to offer petitions, because our Father in heaven knows our cares and our needs. We trust in the promise of a loving God: Ask and it shall be given to you; seek and ye shall find. Inspired by this confidence we pray that the Almighty will pour out His blessings on those we love.

To read the President’s complete remarks, click HERE.

By now, I’m sure you have heard that yesterday, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld a ban on partial-birth abortions. As a pro-life OB-GYN physician, I was very encouraged by this ruling. Partial-birth abortions are gruesome deaths, and I was proud to vote for the legislation upheld by the Supreme Court (the Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003).  To read my thoughts on this ruling, click HERE, and to watch a video of me discussing my experiences as an OB-GYN regarding this important issue, click HERE (Windows Media Player required).

The Republican Study Committee, a group of House conservatives of which Phil is a member, today pointed out yet another example of the Democrats’ failed fiscal responsibility. In a vote on the House floor today, the Democrats will waive House rules that prevent deficit spending:

For years [Democrats] campaigned on it, for months they preached it – pay as you go (PAYGO) rule changes were going to solve everybody’s problems.  Speaker Nancy Pelosi: “After years of historic deficits, this new Congress will commit itself to a higher standard: pay as you go, no new deficit spending. Our new America will provide unlimited opportunity for future generations, not burden them with mountains of debt.”

But that was then. Now, Dems will waive PAYGO.

The new D.C. voting bill would increase mandatory spending…  by about $2.5 million over the FY2008-FY2017 period.  Thus, the Democrat bill violates House Rule XXI, Section 10 (since it would increase the deficit without offset during the periods stated in House Rule XXI). 

Click HERE for more information.

An editorial in this morning’s USA Today supports Phil’s concerns over the Democrats’ misguided emergency war spending bill:

With the House poised to vote Friday on a $124.1 billion budget bill that would end U.S. involvement in Iraq next year, you’d think House leaders would let such a critical decision ride strictly on its merits.

But Democrats are having trouble rounding up votes for the measure. So the leaders are trying to buy votes the old-fashioned way — by luring wavering members with billions of dollars for parochial projects…. These provisions demean a bill that, if enacted, would affect the lives of troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, the balance of power in the Middle East and America’s long-term security.

USA Today goes on to list some of those projects:

•$25 million for spinach growers to recoup losses suffered when contaminated spinach sickened nearly 200 people and resulted in three deaths last year. (Instead of rewarding growers, the government would do better to direct money at safety measures to prevent future contamination.)
•$252 million for a government milk program beneficial to dairy farmers, inserted in the bill by Rep. David Obey, D-Wis., chairman of the Appropriations Committee, which wrote the bill.
•$1.5 billion in livestock assistance for producers affected by wildfires or blizzards.

The editorial also points out the hypocritical nature of this legislation:

The provisions also violate the spirit, if not the letter, of the new majority’s promise to cut back on “earmarks” — provisions slipped into bills that direct your tax dollars to a specific locale or politically favored project.

Last January, as soon as Democrats took control of Congress, the House passed new rules designed to curb earmarks… Yet here they go again, just 10 weeks later, including an assortment of dubious expenditures in “emergency” legislation to finance the war in Iraq and the wider war on terror[.]

Finally, USA Today calls a spade a spade:

[A]n emergency war funding bill — especially one that would set a hard exit date of Aug. 31, 2008, for U.S. troops in Iraq and impose strict readiness standards for deploying combat forces — is no place for extraneous issues. And certainly no place for bribes.

Click HERE to watch a video of Phil criticizing Democrat leaders for buying votes with pork on this bill.

Last week, Phil and other fiscally responsible Members of Congress rolled out the American Taxpayer Bill of Rights – a pledge to taxpayers across this nation that our federal government will stay accountable to those who foot its bills. To learn more about this initiative, click HERE.  In today’s Wall Street Journal (subscription required), Congressman Jeb Hensarling (R-TX) very poignantly lays out the purpose of this Bill of Rights:

Four simple principles. For those who believe Washington spends too much, we agree. For those who believe Washington still taxes too much, we agree. For those who believe we must balance the budget, cut wasteful Washington spending and provide further, permanent tax relief, we agree. And so we pledge to do it better and get it right…. Our leaders must never forget that tax money belongs to the taxpayers, not the government.

Rep. Hensarling is Chairman of the Republican Study Committee, a caucus of conservative House members who are working to keep taxes low and protect our traditional family values. Phil is a proud member of the RSC.

The Washington Times today ran Phil’s letter to the editor criticizing mandatory HPV vaccination.

Phil explained:

As an OB-GYN physician myself, I applaud the development of this vaccine. But as a father, I don’t want to see important health care choices taken away from doctors, parents and patients — and handed over to state bureaucrats. Unlike measles and other communicable diseases, students can’t get HPV from sharing a juice box at lunch or playing on the jungle gym during recess. As HPV falls well outside the appropriate criteria for mandatory vaccination, I have introduced legislation in Congress to prohibit federal dollars from funding mandatory state HPV vaccination programs… While states should certainly help families afford this new drug, parents should be free to choose if vaccination is right for their daughters. We can’t cede this important health care choice to overzealous state legislatures. 

To read the complete letter, click HERE. For more on this issue, click HERE.

In today’s Atlanta Journal Constitution, Phil opines on S.B. 155, legislation introduced in the Georgia state Senate to make HPV vaccination mandatory for all sixth-grade girls.  Phil notes:

[T]he Georgia Legislature would be wrong to implement a mandatory vaccination program for our sixth-grade girls… As a father, physician and member of Congress, I firmly believe parents, not politicians, should be making health care decisions for our children.

His reasoning?

In Georgia, public school students must be vaccinated against a variety of diseases, from measles and mumps to polio and rubella. These diseases pose communicable health threats; vaccination is mandatory to protect our children from the sneezes and coughs of infected schoolmates.

But HPV is not a communicable disease; it is a sexually transmitted disease, one that is passed not through casual contact, but through sexual behavior. In short, our students aren’t at risk of catching HPV by sharing a juice box at lunch or playing tag during recess.

Because of this critical distinction, it is both inappropriate and unprecedented to mandate vaccination for HPV. The Georgia Legislature would do a grave disservice to parents across our state by allowing the government to unnecessarily take a health care decision away from our families.

Phil concludes:

There any many reasons parents might oppose vaccinating their children, from religious objections to age-appropriateness to concerns over side effects and adverse reactions. Whatever the reason, it is a discussion for the doctor’s office, not the statehouse.

When we assume that elected officials better know the health care needs of our children than do their own parents, we risk turning over the care of our loved ones to the whims of our government.

To read the complete Op-Ed, click HERE. To read more about legislation Phil introduced to combat this growing trend, click HERE.

Tonight, President Bush delivered his annual State of the Union address. To read a transcript of his speech, click HERE.

Here are Phil’s responses to some of the President’s goals:

BI-PARTISANSHIP:
“I am extremely pleased President Bush framed his domestic policy initiatives in terms of choice and innovation, not expanded government bureaucracy.  The American people expect the new Democrat majority to address these problems the right way.  Our citizens don’t want socialized medicine or kid gloves for terrorists. We in Congress need to heed this message.”

HEALTHCARE:
“As a physician, I agree we should give individuals greater control over their healthcare decisions, rather than relying on employers and bureaucratic federal programs.  Concerns over health coverage shouldn’t stop someone from switching jobs or starting a new business, but it often does. Increasing choice and competition in our healthcare system will drive down costs and move us away from the current “big government” mindset.”

IMMIGRATION:
“I am concerned the President’s guest worker program amounts to amnesty for illegal immigrants. The state of Georgia has felt the full impact of illegal immigration on our healthcare, education and social welfare systems, and amnesty would only exacerbate these problems.”

IRAQ:
“On Iraq, the President reminded us that our efforts are directly linked to the larger global War on Terror.  He is absolutely right, and it is a connection that is too often forgotten. Simply put, Congress has a solemn responsibility to give our government and military the right tools to protect us from radical terrorists bent on destroying our nation. The President has a plan for victory in Iraq, and Congress shouldn’t tie one hand behind his back as he’s preparing to deliver the knock-out punch.  Success is far more important than kowtowing to political pressure to abandon our mission.”

Š

Phil participated in a press conference yesterday criticizing the Democrats’ failed First 100 Hours agenda.

“The Democrats’ first 100 hours were spent on watered-down initiatives that at best were ineffective and at worst were detrimental to our economy and citizens,” he said. “The Democrats showed their commitment to raising taxes and expanding the federal government. They also showed their willingness to forgo debate and process for sound bite solutions that do nothing to address the real problems facing our nation.  The American people deserve better. We need sound policy, not sound bites.”

Former Majority Leader Tom Delay weighed in after the press conference on his blog:

I would personally like to congratulate and thank Representatives McHenry (R-NC), King (R-IA) and Gingrey (R-GA) for outlining the ramifications of the Democrat’s legislative push in their press conference today.

Ultimately, all of the Democrat’s gooey words about bipartisanship were rendered meaningless by ramming through a rules package designed to silence the opposition and make it easier to push future tax increases through the House. Six pieces of legislation, which the Democrats claim were so important to the national interest, received no hearings by the subcommittees or committees of jurisdiction nor did these ideas receive any hearing or input from the public. Pelosi and her gang silenced their Republican colleagues by refusing to allow them to offer or consider amendments.

For more on the Democrats’ misguided agenda, click HERE and HERE.

As a leading voice in the stem cell debate, Phil this week called for an ethical alternative to the Democrat bill – an alternative that doesn’t destroy human embryos in the search for medical treatments.

LifeNews.com details legislation Phil and Rep. Roscoe Bartlett (R-MD) introduced to fund ethical research on stem cells:

Republican Reps. Roscoe Bartlett of Maryland and Phil Gingrey of Georgia plan to introduce a bill tomorrow that would serve as an alternative to a measure House Democrats have set up for a vote Thursday.  The Bartlett-Gingrey legislation authorizes federal funding for research to derive pluripotent (embryonic-like) stem cell lines without creating or destroying human embryos.

Gingrey, a medical doctor, added that the bill “allows Congress to side-step the moral questions surrounding embryonic stem cell research.”… “In America, we do things the right way,” he said. “We don’t take organs from death row prisoners because they are ‘going to die anyway.’ Neither should we steal the life of a fertilization clinic embryo just because there’s a chance it won’t be used to impregnate a woman.”

CBS News reports on Phil’s support of alternative ethical techniques – the President is a fan, too:

There are different types of stem cells. Fetal stem cells found floating in amniotic fluid are the latest to make headlines, a finding cited by foes of the embryonic stem cell legislation that is certain to pass the House Thursday.

“We don’t have to split the nation on this if we’ve got an alternative,” said Rep. Phil Gingrey, R-Ga., an obstetrician who opposes embryonic stem cell research because culling the cells from 5-day-old embryos destroys them.

“What we hope is that scientists will find ways to unlock the promise of stem cells without having to force people into the choice of claiming a human life in so doing,” White House spokesman Tony Snow said Monday, making clear the president hasn’t changed his stand since vetoing an identical bill to expand embryonic stem cell research just six months ago.

And in the Atlanta Journal Constitution, Phil sums up the essence of the debate:

Rep. Phil Gingrey, a Marietta Republican and longtime obstetrician/gynecologist, maintained there are other sources for the cells… “I know we don’t have to sacrifice human life in order to research ways to save it,” he said.

Click HERE to read the text of Phil’s speech before Congress on this important debate.

Phil posted the following thoughts on The Hill’s CongressBlog:

Yesterday’s news that scientists have isolated stem cells in the amniotic fluid of pregnant women that can grow into a variety of tissue and be used to treat diseases should sound a loud warning to the new Democratic majority. On Thursday, the Democrats will bring up H.R. 3, legislation to fund embryonic stem cell research that destroys human embryos. What won’t they bring up for debate? Any alternatives – including amniotic fluid research. In fact, the Democrats have made it clear that on Thursday, the only stem cell research we’ll be funding is the kind that kills embryos. So what about adult stem cells, cord blood stem cells, and these amniotic stem cells? The Democrats simply aren’t interested.

H.R. 3 (DeGette-Castle) is morally unacceptable. Here in America, we don’t take organs from death row prisoners because they are ‘going to die anyway.’ Neither should we steal the life of a fertilization clinic embryo just because there’s a chance it won’t be used to impregnate a woman. Before we use taxpayer dollars for the destruction of human life, we should take a lesson from yesterday’s scientific findings: we don’t have to sacrifice life in order to research ways to save it.

Today, Rep. Roscoe Bartlett (R-MD) and I introduced H.R. 322, an ethical alternative to the DeGette-Castle legislation. H.R. 322 authorizes federal funding for research to derive pluripotent stem cells (long-lived, adaptable stem cells) without creating or destroying human embryos. Unfortunately, the Democrat leadership is not willing to discuss stem cell alternatives to H.R. 3, preferring to spend taxpayer dollars on destructive research rather than on finding cures in an ethically responsible manner.

But we don’t have to choose between life and science. The Bartlett-Gingrey legislation allows Congress to side-step the moral questions surrounding embryonic stem cell research. Last Congress, all 100 senators voted to pass similar legislation, and 273 House members supported the alternative. President Bush has signaled his willingness to sign this ethical stem cell bill into law.

In fact, the only thing standing between the American people and federal funding for promising, ethical stem cell research is the Democrat leadership and its unwillingness to have a fair and open debate.

The Washington Post today reports on an exciting breakthrough in ethical stem cell research:

A type of cell that floats freely in the amniotic fluid of pregnant women has been found to have many of the same traits as embryonic stem cells, including an ability to grow into brain, muscle and other tissues that could be used to treat a variety of diseases, scientists reported yesterday.

So what is the Democrat’s response to this exciting breakthrough? Later this week, they will bring up H.R. 3, the DeGette-Castle bill. This legislation is morally unacceptable, as it uses federal dollars to fund research that destroys human embryos. But as today’s news shows, there are ethical ways to conduct stem cell research that don’t sacrifice life in the name of science.

As a pro-life OB-GYN, Phil is committed to ethical stem cell research. Tomorrow, he will introduce an alternative to the DeGette-Castle bill.  Click HERE to read about Phil’s bill, which would fund research to develop techniques to derive embryonic and embryonic-like stem cells WIHTOUT harming human embryos.  As Phil explained:

I know we don’t have to sacrifice human life in order to research ways to save it.  Our bill allows Congress to side-step the moral questions surrounding embryonic stem cell research. In America, we do things the right way. We don’t take organs from death row prisoners because they are ‘going to die anyway.’ Neither should we steal the life of a fertilization clinic embryo just because there’s a chance it won’t be used to impregnate a woman. The Democrats are unwilling to fund promising ethical alternatives to DeGette-Castle. This is a misuse of taxpayer dollars.

Today’s news on the amniotic stem cell breakthrough underlines the critical importance of funding alternative research not covered by the DeGette-Castle bill. Yet the new Democrat majority has given no indication they will bring up any alternative to H.R. 3, showing their leadership’s commitment only to stem cell research that destroys human life.