CONGRESSIONAL CRUSADER: Colorado Rep. Diana DeGette takes on the right wing assault on sexual and reproductive sciences in her new book.
Image: COURTESY MOUTH PR
In Brief
Six-term Democratic Congresswoman Diana DeGette owns a dubious distinction: She is one of the two co-authors of the bill that garnered President George W. Bush's first-ever veto.
The subject of the legislation: embryonic stem cells. DeGette, who represents Colorado's 1st District—which includes Denver and its environs—is for them. The president isn't.
On July 19, 2006, President Bush ceremoniously vetoed the bill, the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act of 2005, even though it had passed both the House and Senate by wide margins—though the gaps were not large enough to override a veto. When he signed the veto, the chief executive was surrounded by so-called "snowflake babies," kids born from discarded IVF (in vitro fertilization) embryos that other couples had "adopted" through a Christian agency. These children wouldn't exist, he said, if embryos were used for stem cell research.
These publicity stunts, according to DeGette, have helped kill a wide range of legislation on sex and reproduction: the plan B "morning after" birth control pill, the human papillomavirus vaccine (touted as the best method for preventing cervical cancer), and even sex education—many Republicans advocate abstinence-only instruction.
ScientificAmerican.com caught up with DeGette recently to discuss her new book, Sex, Science and Stem Cells: Inside the Right Wing Assault on Reason, out today. An edited transcript follows.
Why wait so long into the Bush administration to take a stand against its policies—and those of the right wing?
It's really been about 14 years of this right wing escapade—ever since the Republicans took control of Congress—but it has spiraled out of control under the Bush administration. A lot of the policies were started under the Republican leadership of the House, like some of the abstinence-only sex education. But then, under the Bush administration, these policies have gone to a whole new level because they have been the focus of a lot of the Bush administration's efforts toward sex and reproduction.
One of the reasons the book is coming out right now is targeted at the fall 2008 elections to try to say to voters, "When you're looking at who to vote for this year, be it president or members of Congress, you really need to think about science when drafting public policy."
But you're asking people to use this issue as a litmus test; both McCain and Obama voted for your stem cell bill.
It's true John McCain voted for stem cell research, which I am pleased about. But, I am concerned about how he would vote for some of the other cell-based research, like somatic cell nuclear transfer.
On votes relating to sex and reproduction, he has an abysmal voting record. I talk about McCain's votes on all these other issues—federal employee's health care coverage, including birth control; abstinence-only; medically accurate pregnancy prevention programs; the Mexico City global gag rule. So, Sen. McCain might be good on science relating to noncontroversial topics, but he's terrible on science as it relates to sex and reproduction. Some of the edgier and more difficult topics when you're dealing with the religious right.
See what we're tweeting about
19 Comments
Add CommentCome on, you copy editors. Hands aren't bells. People wring their hands, not ring their hands. (Second to last answer.)
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWow, what an incredibly one-sided article.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisCareful, Scientific American - your bias is showing.
Umm, that was an interview not an article genius
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI am glad Rep. DeGette has spoken out against the politicization of the science of sex and reproduction by the religious right. Government should neither regulate nor subsidize any kind of science for any reason, but President Bush's veto against stem cell research was an egregious example of religion's increasingly successful attempts to erase the separation of church and state.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe issue about stem cells research is so delicate because many hope in future possible applications. However, if a cleaner research branch performed as well it would surely be preferred, even by todays advocates of stem cells research. In the face of necessity, who is strong enough to hold on until a solution comprehensively acceptable is found? Sciences negative side effects will ultimately get domesticated through a wisdom package including issues about both science and human dignity.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisGet a dictionary, brainiac.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisRep. DeGette was interviewed for Nikhil Swaminathan's article.
DeGette is being dishonest in couching this debate as the "pro-science heroes" vs. the "antiscience conspiracy." The debate is not about supporting or opposing science; it's about an ethical debate surrounding a particular area of research. Shame on SciAm for perpetuating this dishonesty! http://www.leavethelightson.info/2008/08/scientific-american-interviews-diana.html
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWhat's annoying here, is that no one seems to understand that the bush administration and the "right wingers," don't give a flying bat's hind end about issues, they _use_ them as cattle prods to control the sheeple. George W. is a known well shall we say friend to the non heterosexual as an intimate partner...you can verify that by searching on his name and the title Lips, but he and his used homosexuality as an issue to move things, cause a reaction amongst the emotionally younger in mind voters in order to sway an electoral populance..........bush doesn't have a moral stance, I doubt that he's had a moral thought....but you know that. Do yourselves a favor and learn the difference between having a position and "using others positions" as an emotional whip. Demagogurey is a live and well and being used as a political tool by former CIA officers embedded in the political systems, SEE: Jimmy Carter, Paris, Iran Contra, Russian, October Surprise, Robert M. Gates, George H.W. Bush, William Casey....it's called treason.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisdear occam since when is the truth biased....wanna dance? Do you know the difference between empirics and opinion? What a socratic dialogue implies? How many articles would show up if you searched on: bush funding Al Queada ??? what do the Nazis have to do with the bush family? How is Allen Dulles connected with the Bush family??? Who is Prescott Bush??? Or for that matter what does the CIA drug trafficking have to do with Dick Cheney, CentGas, George H.W. Bush, Zalmay Khalizad, Harmid Karzai, and Condolezza Rice???? Can you say......treason?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisBravo! The Bush administration is so anti-science that they are an embarrassment to the rest of the civilized world. When government restricts scientific research for their own twisted agenda they need to be challenged at every turn. Degette should be commended for her efforts. Thank you SciAm for running the interview.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisLucid13: Get a grip. This is not an issue of pro-science v. anti-science. That's a mischaracterization by DeGette. I wrote in detail about this dishonesty here.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisMIScharacterization, hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm..........that's what I would have said was the normal position of those of YOUR ILK. DeGette seems to be a straight shooter.....the bush administration???? KIlled many IRAQI or Afghani or Panamanian or Salvadoran or Ecuadoran or Colombian or Peruvian or Palestinian or Kurdish babies today.....morally upright???? How's about MORALLY BANKRUPT with some propaganda news casts......and the RELIGIOUS RIGHT......just keep sending that money in to prove that Jesus loves you....like that's what Jesus wants is televangelists with greasy hair making money....off of him.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWhen you interview a politician, you get political comments. No surprise there. But DeGette is correct in saying that a narrow religious view has taken control of the Republican "base", a view based on a literal reading of ancient scripture without the intellectual effort of understanding the tribal context in which it was written. So we have people, some of them in government, who think their salvation hinges on insisting that the universe is a few thousand years old and that we all have an obligation to criminalize anything that would interfere with cranking out as many babies as we can. They are afraid to think more deeply than that.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI think Degette expresses not so much the "politician's" comments, but those of a woman and mother, who wants cures to be realized for our children, without science being politicized.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWhat struck me was this comment: "I think that if the majority of Americans stood up and said, "I am going to elect politicians who care about science in public policy and who vote that way," we would have much better public policy relating to science. "
It is with that in mind that I am currently running for US Congress myself:
http://www.FayeforCongress.com
Perhaps I'm dreaming, but I think that science should be politically neutral because it is empirically-based knowledge. Unfortunately, it's not because scientific research can lead to politically unpalatable conclusions that affect the balance of power in a society (Witness global warming and stem cells as just two examples). In short, if the laws of physics say that a hammer will fall at 32 ft/sec squared on Earth, it doesn't mater if you are liberal, conservative, Democrat or Republican. It will hurt when it lands on your head.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThen the US will fall behind in this field, it is as simple as that.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe right always shouts BIAS BIAS BIAS whenever something can logically explain the fallacies of their 'because i said so' type positions. Don't worry Sci-Am, nothing's more biased than the right wing rhetoric claiminb bias.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAnother liberal hating to be disagreed with always the rightwing how about leftwing dems. tyhe worlds best liars
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAways the same from the liberial left the worlds best liars Blame the right wing what the left wing who has more failed programs and more gov. and more gov. and if you disagree you ae rightwing what ever the weekly term give the worl ma break fade away
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this