108th Congress

Cloning

H.R. 234, S. 245, H.R. 534, S. 303, H.R. 801, H.R. 916, H.R. 938

Background

The controversial issue of human cloning continues to attract considerable congressional and media interest. On December 27, 2002, Clonaid, a company affiliated with the pro-cloning Raelian movement, announced that they had succeeded in cloning the first human baby. This announcement, while generating considerable skepticism, led several Members of Congress to introduce cloning bills soon after the 108th Congress convened. On February 27, 2003, H.R. 534 passed the House of Representatives by a vote of 241 to 155. The bill would have prohibited both human reproductive and therapeutic cloning.

Reproductive cloning is generally defined as the use of cloning technology, otherwise called somatic cell nuclear transfer (SCNT), for initiating a pregnancy; therapeutic cloning is generally defined as the use of SCNT for conducting research in which stem cells (master cells that can differentiate into most cells of the body) are derived from a cloned embryo. SCNT is generally defined as transferring the nucleus of a human somatic cell (any cell other than an egg cell) into an egg cell (oocyte) from which the nucleus has been removed or rendered inert. Although most advocates and Members of Congress are opposed to reproductive cloning, there is considerable disagreement regarding therapeutic cloning. Proponents of therapeutic cloning argue that it may be one way of minimizing immune system rejection problems that can result if the existing stem cell lines are used for clinical purposes, since therapeutic cloning would permit stem cells to be generated using a patient’s own DNA. Opponents argue that the moral and ethical issues related to creating an embryo solely for research purposes and subsequently destroying it to extract stem cells justify a ban on this technology.

During the 108th Congress, five cloning bills were introduced in the House and two in the Senate. The House did not hold any hearings on these measures, although as described above, the House passed H.R. 534 by a wide margin on February 27, 2003. The Senate held three hearings on cloning; two were held by the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Subcommittee on Science, Technology and Space (Senator Sam Brownback [R-KS], Chair) on January 29 and March 27, and one was held by the Senate Committee on the Judiciary (Senator Orrin G. Hatch [R-UT], Chair) on March 19. Adding a slightly different perspective, the March 27 hearing focused on the impact of human cloning on women’s health. Witnesses argued that women would be coerced into donating eggs for research and that drugs used to obtain the eggs have serious side effects.

Provisions of the Legislation/Impact on NIH

H.R. 234/H.R. 534—Human Cloning Prohibition Act of 2003

The bills, introduced by Representative Dave Weldon (R-FL), would have:

• Prohibited reproductive cloning only
• Made it unlawful to 1) conduct or attempt to conduct human cloning, 2) ship the product of nuclear transplantation (another term for SCNT) in interstate or foreign commerce for the purpose of human cloning in the United States or elsewhere, or 3) export to a foreign country an unfertilized blastocyst (early embryo) if the country does not prohibit human cloning
• Required that all research involving nuclear transplantation be conducted in accordance with subparts A and B of 45 CFR 46. These provisions would have required, in part, review by an institutional review board and appropriate informed consent.
• Required GAO to review within 1 year the Attorney General’s enforcement record regarding the provisions of this bill and the manner in which the U.S. Department of Justice is coordinating the efforts of State attorneys general and local law enforcement in enforcing similar State prohibitions. GAO would have also been required to provide a report on laws adopted by foreign countries and the actions taken by those countries to enforce such laws.
• Prohibited the maintenance of an unfertilized blastocyst for more than 14 days from its first cell division, not counting any time during which it is frozen.
• Prohibited the selling or receiving of human oocytes or unfertilized blastocysts for valuable consideration. Valuable consideration does not include reasonable payments to compensate the donor for the time and inconvenience associated with the donation.
• Prohibited nuclear transplantation from being conducted in a laboratory in which human oocytes are subject to assisted reproductive technology treatments or procedures
• Imposed civil and criminal penalties for violation of the provisions of the bill

H.R. 801—Cloning Prohibition Act of 2003

The bill, introduced by Representative Jim Greenwood (R-PA), would have:

• Prohibited the use of cloning technology to initiate a pregnancy or the shipment of a product of cloning technology with the knowledge that the product is intended to be used to initiate a pregnancy
• Not prohibited the following: 1) the use of SCNT to clone molecules, DNA, cells, or tissues, 2) the use of mitochondrial, cytoplasmic, or gene therapy, 3) the use of in vitro fertilization, administration of fertility-enhancing drugs, or use of other medical procedures to assist a woman in becoming or remaining pregnant, 4) the use of SCNT to clone animals other than humans, and 5) any other activity (including biomedical, microbiological, or agricultural research or practices) not expressly prohibited
• Required a person engaging in SCNT to register with the Secretary of Health and Human Services and provide an attestation that the individual is aware of and would not violate the provisions of the bill
• Sunset in 10 years
• Imposed civil and criminal penalties for violation of the provisions of the bill

H.R. 916—Human Cloning Research Prohibition Act

he bill, introduced by Representative Cliff Stearns (R-FL), would have:

• Prohibited the expenditure of any Federal funds to conduct or support any research project that includes the use of human SCNT
• Required the National Science Foundation to contract with the National Research Council to assess the impact that the implementation of the law would have on research

H.R. 938—Human Cloning Prevention Act of 2003

The bill, introduced by Representative Ron E. Paul (R-TX), would have:

• Prohibited any Federal agency from making any grant, contract, or other payment to any entity that has engaged in human SCNT within the past year

Status and Outlook

H.R. 234 was introduced by Representative Weldon on January 8, 2003, and was referred to the House Committees on the Judiciary and on Energy and Commerce.

S. 245 was introduced by Senator Brownback on January 29, 2003, and was referred to the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions.

H.R. 534 was introduced by Representative Weldon on February 5, 2003, and was referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary. It was reported out favorably by that Committee on February 25 and was passed by the House of Representatives on February 27 by a vote of 241 to 155.

S. 303 was introduced by Senator Hatch on February 5, 2003, and was referred to the Senate Committee on the Judiciary.

H.R. 801 was introduced by Representative Greenwood on February 13, 2003, and was referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce. H.R. 801 was offered as an amendment in the form of a substitute when H.R. 534 was being considered on the House Floor. The amendment failed by a vote of 164 to 237.

H.R. 916 was introduced by Representative Stearns on February 25, 2003, and was referred to the House Committees on Energy and Commerce and on Science.

H.R. 938 was introduced by Representative Paul on February 26, 2003, and was referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.

There was no further action on this legislation during the 108th Congress. The Senate failed to consider H.R. 534 or its companion bill, S. 245. It is likely that several of these bills will be reintroduced during the 109th Congress.