Travis County Healtcare Board of Managers, Please Reconsider

Thursday night at the Travis County Commissioners' Court on West 11th Street in downtown Austin, TX the not-elected-but-appointed-by-elected-officials Travis County HEALTHCARE District Board of Managers voted unanimously to use $450,000 of the district's property tax revenue (assessed without recourse to all Travis County property owners) to abort the unborn babies of poor and minority women. Margaret Sanger, who never met a person whom she considered of inferior race whom she didn't want to prevent from reproducing, would be so proud. The Board of Managers should be so ashamed of themselves.

As a result of this decision whether they like it or not, whether they live in Austin or not, whether they believe in the right to life or not, all Travis County Property owners' who pay their property taxes will be funding the killing of the unborn babies of poor and minority women. The Board of Managers made such a decision in the face of overwhelming opposition by the public. Why should the managers care about public opinion, they were not elected to their positions and so do not fear the public.

When unelected boards make life and death public policy decisions that are controversial and opposed by the public such decisions are dictates, not a consensus, not the decisions of a democratic body. Those decisions are therefore of questionable legitimacy. Those decisions should be appealed and litigated, and if there is no recourse they should perhaps be civilly disobeyed, in this case by a taxpayer revolt.

For the sake of decency and respect for the poor and minorities, we at The Travis Monitor urge the Hospital District Board of Managers to reconsider their ill-advised decision made without regard of public opinion.

And one more thing, ABORTION IS NOT HEALTH CARE.

Click here to read the Austin American Statesmen story on the "hearing".

Senator Hutchison's Response Regarding Her Vote for Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act of 2007

On April 18th I posted a letter to Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison questioning her recent vote for the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act of 2007. Here is her response, received just before 6:00 PM today.

Dear Mr. Bradberry:

Thank you for contacting me regarding the use of federal funds for medical research involving embryonic stem cells. I welcome your thoughts and comments on this issue.

There is a growing consensus that stem cells hold enormous potential for health-related therapies. These cells can be multiplied and directed to form virtually any human tissue, from heart muscle to lung, kidney, liver or brain cells, each of which could be used to treat or even cure a wide variety of diseases such as diabetes, Parkinson's or cancer. Currently, the federal government supports research on both adult and embryonic stem cells. In 2001, President Bush became the first president to approve federal funding for research using existing embryonic stem cell lines that were derived from excess embryos created for in vitro fertilization and donated, with informed consent, by couples.

Approximately 400,000 excess frozen embryos are in clinics across the country and will be destroyed if not utilized. The current stem cell debate centers around giving couples a choice of donating the embryos for medical research. I support research involving embryonic stem cells under well-defined conditions. Specifically, there must be close federal oversight to prohibit the creation of embryos solely for the purpose of research.

In June 2004, I joined several of my pro-life Senate colleagues in urging President Bush to expand the existing embryonic stem cell project. My support for this expanded research is consistent with my conservative, pro-family philosophy, because finding and developing new cures for a variety of crippling diseases is vital for protecting and improving human lives. On December 20, 2005, President Bush signed into law S. 1317, the Bone Marrow and Cord Blood Therapy and Research Act of 2005, which provides for the use of human umbilical cord blood stem cells for patient treatment and research.

On June 16, 2006, Senator Rick Santorum (R-PA) introduced S. 3504, the Fetus Farming Prohibition Act, which would prohibit the creation of human embryos strictly for research. I strongly supported this legislation that prevents clinics from having a financial incentive to create embryos far in excess of the number needed for fertility treatments. The President signed this bill into law (PL 109-242) on July 19, 2006.

On January 4, 2007, Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) introduced S. 5, the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act of 2007. This bill would allow scientists to utilize human embryonic stem cells, regardless of the date on which the stem cells were derived from a human embryo. Research would be limited to embryos donated, with written informed consent, from in vitro fertilization clinics that would otherwise be discarded. The bill also incorporated language from Senator Santorum's bill from the 109th Congress, S. 2754, the Alternative Pluripotent Stem Cell Therapies Enhancement Act. It would expand research for the isolation, derivation, production, or testing of stem cells that are capable of producing all or almost all cell types without being derived from a human embryo. I supported this bill because standards need to be in place that would prohibit human cloning but would allow for the use of stem cells that would otherwise be destroyed. The Senate passed S. 5 (63-34), and it has been referred to the House of Representatives.

On March 29, 2007, Senators Norm Coleman (R-MN) and Johnny Isakson (R-GA) introduced S. 30, the Hope Offered through Principled and Ethical Stem Cell Research Act, otherwise known as the HOPE Act. This bill would advance stem cell research by intensifying all alternative methods that avoid the moral dilemma of destroying an embryo in the process. I strongly supported this bill to ensure every attempt is made to use stem cells other than embryos. The Senate passed S. 5 (70-28), and it has been referred to the House of Representatives.

I do not support creating life to destroy life. We must always respect the sanctity of life, even as science explores new frontiers. As researchers seek treatments for diseases afflicting millions, cells from embryos that would otherwise be discarded hold promise for unlocking cures to such debilitating illnesses. Stem cell research has the potential to save lives, and we must ensure it is done ethically and responsibly.

I appreciate hearing from you and hope you will not hesitate to keep in touch on any issue of concern to you.


Sincerely,
Kay Bailey Hutchison