It appears that President Obama is finally going to make good on his campaign promise to lift the restrictions on stem cell research for federally funded projects. Monday may be the day when President Bush’s Executive Order will be reversed. In the meantime a little Devil called the Dickey-Wicker Amendment could toss a monkey wrench into the mix.

It’s a complicated story, but basically the amendment banning federal fund use for embryonic stem cell research was attached as a rider to the 1996 appropriations bill for the Department of Health and Human Services. Congress has continually renewed some version of the ban. The only human embryo research currently conducted is in the private sector. (For more detail on the complex politics of stem cell research see here and here .)

So even if the President signs a new Executive Order will that little devil drag it down?

Democratic Representative Diana DeGette of Colorado is paying attention. She believes that Congress will approve a bill that would make Obama’s executive order law. This would make it more difficult for future administrations to oppose the use of stem cells. (Executive orders can pass back-and-forth like 4 years per move chess games.) But what about the Dickey-Wicker amendment? Can it just be dumped? Not if the “culture of life” legislators have anything to say about it.

In the meantime, some of our leading stem cell researchers are at NIH, and top experts at other sites depend on federal grants to implement their promising projects. They don’t want to wait another day.

Stay tuned!

Sen. Robert Byrd (D-W.Va.), the longest serving Democratic senator, is criticizing President Obama’s appointment of White House “czars” to oversee federal policy, saying these executive positions amount to a power grab by the executive branch.

In a letter to Obama on Wednesday, Byrd complained about Obama’s decision to create White House offices on health reform, urban affairs policy, and energy and climate change. Byrd said such positions “can threaten the Constitutional system of checks and balances. At the worst, White House staff have taken direction and control of programmatic areas that are the statutory responsibility of Senate-confirmed officials.”

Well, I am glad someone is pointing it out. Our system of Checks and Balances have been sorely thwarted over the past 8 years. Sadly, Obama has demonstrated that he is all too willing to maintain what Bush has done (FISA, States Secrets, Extraordinary Rendition, to name a few), and as Senator Byrd points out, is expanding the power of the Executive Branch:

While it’s rare for Byrd to criticize a president in his own party, Byrd is a stern constitutional scholar who has always stood up for the legislative branch in its role in checking the power of the White House. Byrd no longer holds the powerful Appropriations chairmanship, so his criticism does not carry as much weight these days. Byrd repeatedly clashed with the Bush administration over executive power, and it appears that he’s not limiting his criticism to Republican administrations.

Byrd also wants Obama to limit claims of executive privilege while also ensuring that these White House czars don’t have authority over Cabinet officers confirmed by the Senate.

“As presidential assistants and advisers, these White House staffers are not accountable for their actions to the Congress, to cabinet officials, and to virtually anyone but the president,” Byrd wrote. “They rarely testify before congressional committees, and often shield the information and decision-making process behind the assertion of executive privilege. In too many instances, White House staff have been allowed to inhibit openness and transparency, and reduce accountability.”

The West Virginia Democrat on Wednesday asked Obama to “consider the following: that assertions of executive privilege will be made only by the president, or with the president’s specific approval; that senior White House personnel will be limited from exercising authority over any person, any program, and any funding within the statutory responsibility of a Senate-confirmed department or agency head; that the President will be responsible for resolving any disagreement between a Senate-confirmed agency or department head and White House staff; and that the lines of authority and responsibility in the Administration will be transparent and open to the American public.”

Senator Byrd spoke out on this very thing in regard to Bush:

I must say, though, if Senator Bryd had been paying attention, he would have been well aware that transparency was never high on Obama’s list. This president who has provided no legislative papers, no datebooks, no college transcripts, no graduate transcripts, no authentic birth certificate. To expect any transparency now is almost laughable. If it wasn’t so disturbing…

So far, Obama has not chosen to distinguish himself from some of the more egregious decisions Bush has made, as noted above. There is still time for him to do so:

Obama faces a decision as early as next week on whether to support a claim of executive privilege made by former President Bush in refusing to allow Karl Rove, the former deputy White House chief of staff, to be deposed by the House Judiciary Committee on the White House’s role in the 2006 firing of nine U.S. attorneys.

Bush claimed “absolute immunity” for top advisors in resisting such subpoenas, by Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich.), chairman of the Judiciary Committee, filed a lawsuit over the issue. The case is on appeal, and the Obama administration is scheduled to file a motion next week laying out its stance on the issue.

I am glad Senator Byrd is speaking out on behalf of the Constitution. I am glad he is trying to keep Obama’s attempt to expand Executive Powers.

How I wish Senator Byrd had stood with the people of his state this summer (Senator Rockefeller, too). How I wish he had been moved to listen to the majority of people during the Primaries who made their voices clear. How I wish he had supported with his vote the person who would not have participated in these Executive power grabs. But no. Despite his relationship with Hillary Clinton (and her husband), despite two-thirds of his state going for Clinton, he picked Obama. And now he is beginning to see what we saw. Now he is beginning to see the power grabs, the lack of transparency, the move away from Checks and Balances. Now he is beginning to see. I fear it is too little, too late…

In one of his first acts as president, Barack Obama is planning to lift a rule that prevents federal money from going to international family planning groups that counsel women on abortion or perform the procedure. [This will help women worldwide.]

Obama’s repeal of the abortion aid policy is one of several executive actions he will take soon after his inauguration today, according to Obama transition aides. He is also considering lifting Bush administration restrictions on federally funded stem cell research. …

Then there’s this story from a pro-life publication with a chilling title: “Bioethicist: Obama Letting Congress Kill Bush Stem Cell Policy Smacks of Politics.” Obviously the “bioethicist” is opposed to stem cell research but, like me, he sees Obama as choosing the cowardly route of putting the onus on Congress, not on himself.

I have a strong hunch that President Obama is vacillating due to pressure from the powerful black ministers who brought him busloads of votes as well as his cozy alliances with conservative mega-church ministers like Rick Warren. It’s just a hunch. Surely those religious leaders are also pressuring Obama on the abortion rule. So, I’m a skeptic, and I believe in Obama’s “change” when I see him actually bring about change. The first way I will see his “change” is when he has some guts and nerve, and overrides Bush’s executive orders. Passing the buck to Congress is an “easy out” for a man who campaigned vigorously promising reversals on stem cell research.

I checked the new White House Web site — do check out this site! — and confirmed that President Obama has signed no Executive Orders or Proclamations:

Now for my January 18th piece, which Ani asked me to republish. Why? It’s important. If Obama passes this off to Congress, it’s a “tell,” as they say in poker. If Obama comes through, I’ll begin to change my mind about his character — as in, maybe he has some. Character, I mean. Although he’s going to have to come through with a lot more before I ever become a fan. A whole hell of a lot more.

As so many readers said here the other day, if Hillary had been sworn in today, she’d have already rescinded Bush’s Executive Order on stem cell research, as well as that affecting women around the world.

ORIGINAL STORY: As the great political thinker Mae West once said, “An ounce of performance is worth pounds of promises.”

Institutions, scientists, and states’ governors across the nation are giddy with anticipation that President Barack Obama will strike Bush’s stem cell executive order. Twenty-one Nobel Laureates wrote a letter to PEBO last month; the letter organizer said that “he feels sure the incoming president will be receptive.” Writes a San Francisco Chronicle reporter in “Californians optimistic Obama will reward state” on January 18, 2008:

[O]ne of the most high-profile initiatives the incoming administration supports is stem cell research. That would reverse eight years of Bush opposition – and no region is better positioned to benefit than the Bay Area.

The UCSF Mission Bay project in San Francisco is the state’s stem cell research hub, and throughout Silicon Valley and the East Bay, research scientists are already bracing for a funding boom. …

There are stories like this across the nation.

Those stories also come from Atlanta, Georgia, which is counting on an infusion of funding for its research facilities which, of course, also means new jobs, new tax revenues, and all the benefits that state governments accrue from a growing industry like stem cell research. (See the Atlanta Journal-Constitution‘s “Stem cells could be big business for state.”) Then there are the hundreds of thousands who suffer from debilitating diseases who are counting on Obama’s promise of immediate action. We recall that Obama attacked John McCain for not strongly supporting the research. And we note that Obama’s transition team promised lightning-fast action.

But then there came Obama’s statements to CNN’s John King today — the same day that those hopeful stories in San Francisco, California and Atlant, Georgia were published.

The REALITY: Obama is backtracking on rescinding Bush’s executive orders and instead, he told King today, he prefers that Congress pass a bill, which will take, oh, how many months and/or years?

So much for an “ounce of performance”:

Here is CNN’s and The New Yorker‘s Jeffrey Toobin discussing the POWER that Barack Obama will have as of noon, January 20, 2009, to undo Bush’s stifling restrictions on stem cell research, abortion counseling, and other important issues to millions of Americans:

But, instead, here’s what Obama told John King today. I’ll title this section this way:

Well, you know …

KING: You will have the power at the end of that parade to, at the stroke of a pen, lift the federal ban on embryonic stem cell research. There may be the votes to do it in Congress now, but you don’t have to wait, you could do it in your first few minutes in office, will you?

OBAMA: Well, you know, if we can do something legislative, then I usually prefer a legislative process because those are the people’s representatives. 

And I think that on embryonic stem cell research, the fact that you have a bipartisan support around that issue, the fact that you have Republicans like Orrin Hatch who are fierce opponents of abortion and yet recognize that there is a moral and ethical mechanism to insure that people with Parkinson’s disease and Alzheimer’s can actually find potentially some hope out there, you know, I think that sends a powerful message.

So we’re still examining what things we’ll do through executive order. But I like the idea of the American people’s representatives expressing their views on an issue like this. …

Blah, blah, blah.

“I like the idea of the American people’s representatives expressing their views on an issue like this. …”

TRANSLATION: “I am passing the buck so I don’t have to take any heat from any religious leaders. And to HELL with the millions of people who voted for me in good part because stem cell research restrictions were what they expected– KNEW and had GOOD FAITH — that you would undo.”

California and Georgia, you can sit and wait. Boy, can you imagine the feelings of all of the people who were interviewed for those news stories in today’s San Francisco Chronicle and “Atlanta Journal-Constitution?

Obama just knocked the breath right out of them.

How about people like Amy Comstock Rick, interviewed for CNN’s article that accompanied the above video, “Obama may reverse Bush policies on stem cells, drilling, abortion,” which was written in December 2008, while there was still reason to HOPE that Obama would act quickly and decisively:

Obama is expected to use his executive authority to reverse Bush’s order limiting the types of embryonic stem cell research that can receive federal tax dollars.

Advocates for those suffering from a host of diseases — including diabetes, Parkinson’s disease and spinal cord injuries — are eagerly awaiting the Bush-era restrictions to be lifted.

“We have every reason to believe — if not on Day One, then in the very near future — they will be issuing an order rescinding this policy,” said Amy Comstock Rick, president of the Coalition for the Advancement of Medical Research.

Ms. Comstock Rick, I’m afraid you’ll have to wait. And given how inefficient the Democratic Congress is, you’re very likely going to have to wait quite a long time. Which is nuts, when Obama could undo this with the stroke of his pen. I’m sorry for you, Ms. Comstock Rick. I bet you voted for Obama expecting that he’d act very quickly for you. You counted on him. And why not? He gave you every reason to “hope” that there would be “change,” didn’t he? But, as those of us who scrutinized his history very closely came to find out, for Barack Obama those are often mere words to use to win elections. Because winning is the prize. Governing, not so much.

We were excoriated for our opposition to Sen. Obama. Yet, we felt compelled to warn people this is that was going to happen.

Now, if stem cell research is important to you — as it is to me because I have conditions from which such advances would be meaningful — please write to President Obama immediately, and DEMAND that he fulfill his campaign promises.

The AFP has a story, “Obama wants Congress to act on lifting stem cells ban” as does Politico.com, “Obama may not lift stem cell limits.”

Now there’s change for you.

Not.

Oh I love this quote from the AFP article cited above:

If the research could yield hope for victims of degenerative diseases such as Parkinson’s and Alzheimer’s, “I think that sends a powerful message,” [Obama] said.

Isn’t that touching. A powerful message. What in the hell about the millions of people whose lives could be changed for the better?

Who in the hell cares about a “powerful message”?

People want their lives back!

Show some guts, would you?