I don't want a wasteful, taxpayer funded government project on this important research. Let private industry do it. They will do a better job. Don't you agree?
2006-07-19 08:00:49 · 20 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Civic Participation
I couldn't agree more and I really hate that people don't realize that there's no ban on stem cell research, like you said. There's just very limited federal funding for it.
Personally, I don't know where the constitution says it's the federal government's job to do research in medicine. Just haven't been able to pin point that line in there... not totally sure why.
Oh wait... maybe because IT'S NOT THERE!
The government does way more than it was ever meant to do according to our constitution, these days and we can thank people like FDR and LBJ for that.
Thomas Jefferson and many of the framers must be turning in their graves today.
But yeah, private companies should definitely be looking into this stuff... I'm sure there's a lot of money to be made if it works.
2006-07-19 08:08:48 · answer #1 · answered by Erik B 2 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Are you making the assumption that people don't know the difference? Because I do.
When this bill was being petitioned in our California, there was no clear explanation of the bill at all. It was very misleading in the wording of this bill in order to get enough signatures to be introduced into legislation. It was never disclosed that the funding would go to an esoteric group of "researchers" who only want to keep themselves in a job and only have a theory to go on. So, in short, the stem cell research bill was passed because many people who signed this bill were lied to. The truth is, the bill doesn't create new jobs for research at all. It doesn't allow for any competition with other independent researchers. The truth is, the people who proposed this bill in the first place had NO evidence that stem cell research would cure certain maladies and diseases. This simply is NOT true. Their acclaimed "research" is based solely on theory.
Do I think the government (we) should pay these so-called researchers? HELL no. I agree that the private industry, without influence, will give a more truthful and accurate answer about stem cell research and its possible benefits (if any).
2006-07-19 15:15:37 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
He vetoed government funding for stem cell research because he's adamantly against stem cell research. If you're for it, then he disagrees with you, trust me.
Private industry will do a much better job if they have government help. What you don't realize is that much of the great scientific research is assisted by government funding. It does *not* mean that the research is actually run by a government organization. Even if it were, our national labs produce some of the most cutting edge research in the world.
The Apollo missions, nuclear power, and the Internet all came about from research performed by the government.
2006-07-19 15:10:25 · answer #3 · answered by Dan C 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Hey, not only that, but Bush was the first President EVER to allow federal funding of limited stem cell research.
I also think it's funny that people make a big deal about the fact that he hasn't veoted anything yet. It's because Congress hasn't passed any bills that he doesn't agree with. People use that fact derisevely, but I think it's pretty remarkable that, despite that fact that he has openly quarrelled with Congress and they have not been able to achieve many of the huge changes he wanted to make, they still haven't passed any bills that he would have to veto.
2006-07-19 15:05:12 · answer #4 · answered by MDPeterson42 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, there is obviously a difference, but government funding is the most lavish and is the most, $ wise. Bush would rather have men and women dying for an unjust cause in his war, than letting this important bill pass. Go figure.
2006-07-19 15:03:53 · answer #5 · answered by Dan 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Private industry has not done it , because Bush will veto the bill. you would need to be in the position , of those needing cures, that can come from this research, to appreciate its value. No I don't agree.
2006-07-19 15:04:47 · answer #6 · answered by kritikos43 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Why should the Democrats make that distinction? It would spoil a great chance to demagogue the issue.
If the Democrats want to kill babies to do embryo stem cell research they can do it legally with private funding.
Of course, if they wanted to accomplish the same thing ethically, they could could do that too. They would just use placenta stem cells which are virtually identical to embryo stem cells.
2006-07-19 15:02:30 · answer #7 · answered by Answer Man 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
True, goverermtn fund too many useless program i grant he veteo this one, but also need to some work at that missle def system we spend way too much billion and yet has show some serious result that F-22 program is also a failure. some time they learn their mistake like they replace F-35 over F-22 similr fund but can make aleast 5x more plane than F-22 for the same cost.
2006-07-19 15:06:21 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Amounts to the same thing since a lot of researchers rely on government grants to fund the research.
2006-07-19 15:05:52 · answer #9 · answered by Daniel H 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's not possible to fund such a costly endeavor without federal funding. No private enterprise is able or willing to spend the money. Why? Because the main prupose of PRIVATE enterprise is to make money and survive! You can't do that with costly ventures and research without funding! Use your brain!
2006-07-19 15:07:36 · answer #10 · answered by Agenda Dog 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋