Stem cell research became a big issue in the 2006 mid terms. First, because Bush used his first ever veto on it, and then again, towards the end, when we saw the strength of Michael J. Fox, and the stupidity of Rush Limbaugh take center stage. In Missouri, stem cell research was certainly a prominent issue, and the Fox/Limbaugh incident drew attention to the issue nationally. In light of comments by Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, that repealing the stem cell restrictions will be a top priority in the new Congress, I thought I would look at, roughly, how the votes have shifted as a result of the elections.
First, in the House. Despite GOP control, the vote last year came down in favor of stem cell research 235-193, falling well short of the number necessary to override(290). Here's my calculation on how the votes could shift. The following GOP congressmen who voted "no" lost or were replaced by Democrats this month(new congressman in parentheses):
Bob Beauprez(Ed Perlmutter)
Chris Chocola(Joe Donnelly)
Mike Fitzpatrick(Patrick Murphy)
Gil Gutknecht(Tim Walz)
Melissa Hart(Jason Altmire)
JD Hayworth(Harry Mitchell)
John Hostettler(Brad Ellsworth)
Bob Ney(Zack Space)
Jim Nussle(Bruce Braley)
Richard Pombo(Jerry McNerney)
Jim Ryun(Nancy Boyda)
Don Sherwood(Chris Carney)
Mike Sodrel(Baron Hill)
Charles Taylor(Heath Schuler)
The "not voting category" included 5 Democrats, and Republican Anne Northup, who was defeated. Assuming everyone above and these 6 "new" votes vote yes, it only puts us at 255 "yes" votes, 35 short of veto proof. Another problem is 14 House Democrats voted against the stem cell bill. There are some good Democrats among on that list, like Dale Kildee, Jim Oberstar, and Mrcy Kaptur. It will be interesting to see if we can get some of these reps to switch, and convince Republican reps(voting in a non-election year this time) to vote for this bill. It will be very tough, but I hope it can be done.
In the Senate, the road to a veto proof margin looks easier. Last year's vote came down 63-37, with every senator voting on the bill.
Every Democrat except Ben Nelson voted for the bill. Five of the senators who voted "no" are now out of office: Allen, Burns, Dewine, Santorum, and Talent. Only one new seantor, Bob Casey Jr., is against/is wishy washy on this issue. Which could pose a problem. Why? Because Bill Frist, who voted for the bill, is out of office, replaced by Bob Corker, who I believe is anti-stem cell research. Assuming everyone else who voted for the bill last year votes "yes" again, and so do the new senators except Casey and Corker, the vote comes down to 66 "yea", one less than is necessary for overriding a veto. I still hold out the hope that someone on the "no" side will see the light, perhaps change their position(like Frist did), especially considering it is not an election year. Or they will change their vote for political reasons(like Coleman and Sununu, two senators who are vulnerable in 08). Or perhaps Casey will change his mind, since I'm not sure he would face repercussions, electorally, for switching to a "yes" vote. Of course, I guess the Senate vote is moot, if we cant get a veto-proof majority in the House. No matter what happens, voting on this issue is a good way to keep the issue in the public spotlight.