U.S. District Judge Royce C. Lamberth issued a temporary injunction against the use of Federal funds on embryonic stem cell research. Citing the Dickey-Wicker Amendment, the Judge said:

The Dickey-Wicker Amendment unambiguously prohibits the use of federal funds for all research in which a human embryo is destroyed … It is not limited to prohibit federal funding of only the ‘piece of research’ in which an embryo is destroyed. Thus, if ESC [embryonic stem cell] research is research in which an embryo is destroyed, the guidelines, by funding ESC research, violate the Dickey-Wicker Amendment.

Doing some quick reading, the Dickey-Wicker Amendment states:

SEC. 509. (a) None of the funds made available in this Act may be used for–

(1) the creation of a human embryo or embryos for research purposes; or
(2) research in which a human embryo or embryos are destroyed, discarded, or knowingly subjected to risk of injury or death greater than that allowed for research on fetuses in utero under 45 CFR 46.208(a)(2) and Section 498(b) of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 289g(b)) (Title 42, Section 289g(b), United States Code).

(b) For purposes of this section, the term “human embryo or embryos” includes any organism, not protected as a human subject under 45 CFR 46 (the Human Subject Protection regulations) . . . that is derived by fertilization, parthenogenesis, cloning, or any other means from one or more human gametes (sperm or egg) or human diploid cells (cells that have two sets of chromosomes, such as somatic cells).

Disagreeing with the ruling, Dr. Francis Collins of the National Institutes of Health said, “This will mean very promising research will not get done, screening for new drugs will stop, and researchers who have been energized will likely grow discouraged and move to other countries or on to other research.” However, that is a fallacy, since there is plenty of corporate and private funding available. If you recall, I wrote an article back on 1/26/2009 based upon the premise of using Federal funds to destroy embryos.

This action has often been called an assault to science. To me, it is called using taxpayers funds wisely. There is enough private funding in the field at the moment that government funding isn’t necessary. Additionally, there is no law requiring the government to fund any research. If Bush had banned the research all together, then there would be grounds for protest by the medical community, but this wasn’t the case. If Bush banned all federal funding into the field of research, there would definitely be complaining, but the research would still be allowed to continue (with private funding).

Stepping back in time to 2001, I think the medical community, plus any other special interest group out there, should recognize that there are many sources of funding (both private and public) available for stem cell research as a whole. If the federal government were willing to increase funding on one segment of research and restrict funding on another, the logical course of action would be the reallocation of resources. Shift private funding to embryonic stem cell research and apply for public funding on adult and cord blood stem cell research. You would still see an increase in funding without picking a fight with the government and creating partisan divide (and confusion).

Without legislation to remove/replace the Dickey-Wicker Amendment, I do not see how the spending on embryonic stem cell research will resume. My hope is that the Judge and the public will not fall victim to the fallacious argument put forward by people like Dr. Collins, who believe that they must have Federal funding in order to conduct the research. If the pharmaceutical companies and lobbies believe that embryonic stem cell research will bring about the holy grail of medical discoveries, then they would be more than willing to invest in the technology for financial gain.

I came across this comic last week and thought it was perfect, especially when Secretary Gates announced he was working to improve the efficiency of the Pentagon’s budget.  Click on the image to enlarge.

Secretary of Defense Robert Gates announced this week that he is considering shutting down the Joint Forces Command which is operating out of Norfolk, Virginia.  In a decision based upon the Pentagon’s budget, Gates said that “The culture of endless money that has taken hold must be replaced by a culture of savings and restraint.” With a budget of around $240 Million (according to the Washington Post), the decision is not due to a reduction in the Pentagon’s budget, but rather a better use of funds.

Naturally, elected officials from Virginia denounced the idea. Governor Bob McDonnell held a news conference with other politicians, announcing the formation of a state commission tasked to secure and expand the presence of the military and national security facilities and operations within the state. Additionally, McDonnell stated “this administration is cutting investments in national defense in order to pay for massive new social programs.” Even Democrat Senators Mark Warner and Jim Webb (former Secretary of the Navy) came out against the decision. Webb wondered if the command was the best item to cut due to their successful role in increasing the efficiency of the military.

Out of curiosity, I decided to log onto Facebook to see what Virginians were saying about this decision. Looking up McDonnell’s official page, the comments ranged from the emotional to the political to the economical. Some comments by the users included:

Comments calling Democrats anti-military:
User 1: As with previous D Administrations, the ONLY place they find to cut is defense. Not saying Def cuts aren’t possible, but like this, they are usually politically motivated and counterproductive.

User 2: A weaker America, shades of Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton. Weaken America and the world loses respect and we fall under attack, history does repeat itself. Help stop the nonsense Governor.

Comments citing the action as retribution towards Virginia for challenging the Administration:
User 3: Purely political!!! Punish Va for going republican.

User 4: Obama is seeking revenge against Virginia and its Republican governor and AG.

Comments calling out Republicans about government spending:
User 5: Folks always want cuts until the cuts are close to home. These cuts are not all government jobs, many will be private sector contractors as well.

User 6: Look, just saying, the crowd that wants everything cut, less government, less spending, more money to spend for themselves never seems to want to cut anything unless it doesn’t effect them. Makes your whole arg…ument that Washington is out of control seem meaningless.

Comments about the economic impact to the region:
User 7: Closing JFCOM kills a lot of jobs here in VA, it makes military members who already move too much have to move again and screws those of us who were told we’d be here for three or more years so we jumped in and bought homes.

User 8: As someone one who lives in the Hampton Roads area, if JFCOM closes, it would be devastating to this region.

If this proposal goes through, it is my hope that the draw-down takes a little longer than the one-year timeline that Gates has proposed. A sudden draw-down of the command (roughly 5000 military personnel, government employees, and contractors) could create an avoidable economic vacuum that will hurt local businesses.

I have to credit Users 5 and 6 for pointing out that people are all for reductions in the government until it impacts themselves. Someone will always be negatively impacted when government is scaled back, so you can’t have a double-standard when the cuts are in your own backyard.

Virginia is second only to California for the revenue it generates as a result of the presence of military and national security facilities. As such, regions like Norfolk have handled the economic downturn well – even with BRAC moves taking place. The Commonwealth of Virginia could withstand the economic impact of the closure of the command, even though thousands of households would be impacted.

I don’t fault McDonnell and the elected officials for challenging this decision, though I do think that they need to make sure they don’t come across as being hypocritical in their arguments for saving JFCOM.