About us Login Get email updates
Research
Print

NY Times, CNN reported Bush signed "fetal farming" ban, failed to note there is no such thing as "fetal farming"

July 21, 2006 8:29 pm ET

SUMMARY: In their coverage of President Bush's recent veto of embryonic stem cell legislation, The New York Times and CNN reported that Bush also signed a bill that day banning "fetal farming" -- creating embryos or fetuses specifically for use as a source of cells or tissue. But neither noted that "fetal farming" is neither being carried out, nor is it "under serious scientific consideration," as National Public Radio's Julie Rovner reported.

25 Comments

In their coverage of President Bush's July 19 veto of legislation that would have expanded federal funding for embryonic stem cell research, The New York Times and CNN reported that Bush also signed a bill that day banning "fetal farming" -- creating embryos or fetuses specifically for use as sources of cells or tissue. But neither the Times nor CNN noted that "fetal farming" is a nonexistent practice -- it is neither being carried out, nor is it "under serious scientific consideration," as National Public Radio health policy correspondent Julie Rovner reported on the July 19 broadcast of Morning Edition. While the Chicago Tribune also reported Bush's expected signing of the "fetal farming" bill without noting the strictly hypothetical nature of the practice, a separate article by the same reporter noted that "fetal farming" is not actually taking place.

Rovner reported that the "Fetus Farming Prohibition Act of 2006" -- proposed by Sen. Rick Santorum (R-PA) and co-sponsored by Sens. Sam Brownback (R-KS), Richard Burr (R-NC), and Jeff Sessions (R-AL) -- was motivated by "politics," as opposed to any purported need to ban an actual scientific practice. According to Rovner, "Republican leaders knew" that Bush would veto the embryonic stem cell bill, "[s]o they came up with two other bills he could sign, allowing him to claim to be pro-stem cell research." The first bill -- proposed by Santorum and passed by the Senate -- encouraged research using stem cells not derived from human embryos. But a motion to suspend the House rules and pass the bill failed to achieve the two-thirds majority required in a July 18 vote. (On a Monday or Tuesday, a motion may be filed to suspend the rules of the House and pass a bill without amendments, allowing only 40 minutes of debate. This type of motion requires a two-thirds majority to pass and is typically used only for swift consideration of non-controversial legislation.) The second bill banned "fetal farming" and was signed by Bush July 19.

The Times and CNN reported Bush's signing of the "fetal farming" ban without noting the strictly hypothetical nature of "fetal farming." A July 20 New York Times article by staff writer Sheryl Gay Stolberg reported that Bush had "signed a 'fetal farming' measure, barring trafficking in embryos and fetuses with the intent of harvesting body parts." The article did not note, however, that "fetal farming" is not actually being carried out, nor is it being seriously considered by the scientific community:

The bill Mr. Bush vetoed would have allowed taxpayer-financed research on lines derived from embryos slated for destruction by fertility clinics. Mr. Bush also signed a ''fetal farming'' measure, barring trafficking in embryos and fetuses with the intent of harvesting body parts.

''These boys and girls are not spare parts,'' the president said in a speech that was interrupted repeatedly by hoots of applause, and twice by standing ovations. ''They remind us of what is lost when embryos are destroyed in the name of research.''

Similarly, a July 20 CNN.com article reported that Bush had "signed the 'fetal farming' legislation," which would "ban the commercial production of human fetal tissue":

Opponents argue that other alternatives, such as adult stem cells, are available. Two companion bills -- one to promote alternative means of developing stem-cell lines from sources such as placental blood and another to ban the commercial production of human fetal tissue, also known as "fetal farming" -- passed the Senate in 100-0 votes.

On Tuesday evening, the House approved the "fetal farming" bill 425-0 but didn't pass the measure promoting alternative stem-cell sources when backers failed to achieve the two-thirds majority that House rules required. The vote on the alternative-sources bill was 273-154.

Bush signed the "fetal farming" legislation and urged Congress to fund alternative research.

Additionally, a July 19 Chicago Tribune article by correspondent Jill Zuckman reported Bush's expected signing of the "fetal farming" ban, but failed to note that "fetal farming" is not actually being conducted. However, in a subsequent July 20 article reporting Bush's signing of the "fetal farming" ban, Zuckman noted that "scientists say ["fetal farming"] is not happening."

From the Chicago Tribune's July 19 article:

The Senate also passed a bill to promote research that does not include creation or destruction of embryos, something already allowed under current law. And it passed a bill to prohibit "fetal farming," or growing embryos for the sole purpose of harvesting tissue. The votes were 100-0 in both cases.

The House passed the fetal farming bill Tuesday night but did not get the necessary two-thirds vote for the other measure. Bush is expected to sign the fetal farming bill as early as Wednesday. Another House vote is possible on the bill to promote research that doesn't include creation or destruction of embryos.

From the Chicago Tribune's July 20 article:

At the White House, Bush issued his veto in private, without cameras present. He also signed a bill into law to prohibit "fetal farming," growing fetuses for the sole purpose of harvesting tissue, which is something that scientists say is not happening.

From the July 19 broadcast of NPR's Morning Edition:

ROVNER: But politics is playing a major role in this debate. Republican leaders knew President Bush would veto the bill expanding funding of embryonic stem cell research, putting him at odds with most of the public. So, they came up with two other bills he could sign, allowing him to claim to be pro-stem cell research.

Kansas Republican Senator Sam Brownback is sponsor of one of those bills. It would ban so-called fetus farming, in which embryos are gestated in women or animals before being harvested for their stem cells or other tissues. He says his measure represents an important step even if the practice isn't under serious scientific consideration.

BROWNBACK: Somebody was saying, well, we weren't going to do it anyway, but that's what they said about human cloning when we started out on this debate; so you're going to ban "fetal farming."

ROVNER: But the other supposedly noncontroversial bill failed to pass when it reached the House last night. It would encourage research into alternative ways to find stem-cells that show as much promise as those derived from human embryos. The attack on the bill was launched by sponsors of the bill facing the veto. Colorado Democrat Diana DeGette insisted she has substantive concerns about the bill, but she also admitted the effort was partly to deprive the president of some political cover.

REP. DIANA DeGETTE (D-CO): No one will be fooled by this fig leaf. The tens of millions of people who suffer from diseases like Parkinson's, diabetes, paralysis, cancer, they know that this research holds hope and they know that 72 percent of Americans support this.

ROVNER: This snag is apparently a temporary one. The House, later today, is expected to bring the bill up for a second vote it will likely win. And any attempt to override the promised veto will almost certainly fail.

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by therick (July 21, 2006 9:21 pm ET)
         

      I was looking forward to getting a new tractor.

      Nothing like getting up early on a midsummers morning when the due has just settled on the grass, then go to the back 40 and check the rows of fresh fetuses. Sometimes, if the weather's right, and if you plant early enough, you can get as many as 3 harvests a year.

      Now, they'll have to be grown in small clearings way back in the woods, where no one will find them. The harvests will have to be smuggled in bales surrounded by hay or straw, and fetus runners will have to be hired to distribute the product.

      This will certainly drive the price up, and it makes it hardly worth the effort. Poor people won't be able to afford fresh fetuses, and will have to settle for the old crops, or the ones that are deformed--the "seconds."

      Of coarse, there will be gangs of fetus runners--machine gun toting killers who have no regard for human life. Cities will be divided up by the crime lords, and if rival gang members cross these lines it will be all out war.

      Perhaps after 10 or 12 years of this madness, the law will be reversed, and once again, fetuses will be harvested by large companies--legally. This will be the end of the gangland fetus runners, and things will finally get back to normal.

      Report Abuse
      • Author by iflurry8094 (July 22, 2006 12:49 am ET)
           

        My grandpappy would often sit me on his knee and tell me about the Embryo Boon of '53...

        Wonderful post, THERICK. Reminded me of why I come here.

        Report Abuse
      • Author by republichater (July 22, 2006 9:31 am ET)
           

        And that is EXACTLY the impression that liberals (all) give to the general public. That liberals want that sort of thing to happen if scientists are given the green light to manufacter as many stem cells as they want. Why do you think Bush signed that bill? Because he knows how liberals think and you showed perfectly how they think.

        Report Abuse
    • Author by IRONY 101 (July 21, 2006 9:44 pm ET)
         

      No fetal farming? I guess this means no farm sudsidies for it either. Dang!

      Report Abuse
      • Author by temphandle brag7loom (July 22, 2006 4:41 pm ET)
           

        It was in the $190 billion Ag bill that Bush didn't veto. The earmark for fetal farming was introduced by Sen. Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania.

        Oh, wait. I read that wrong. The earmark was for "fetus fondling".

        Never mind.

        Report Abuse
    • Author by pjcarter (July 21, 2006 10:47 pm ET)
         

      This is just like Bush's mention of animal-human hybrids in the State of the Union address. It doesn't exist. Ain't going to happen unless you're watching a really bad Saturday night movie on the Sci-Fi Network.

      Report Abuse
      • Author by therick (July 21, 2006 10:50 pm ET)
           

        You must think I'm making that entire post up. :)

        Report Abuse
      • Author by temphandle brag7loom (July 22, 2006 4:37 pm ET)
           

        Oh, If only that abomination could have been stopped in time (before "The Howling" and the "Teen Wolf" movies)!

        Report Abuse
    • Author by HuntingtonBeachLefty (July 22, 2006 2:14 am ET)
         

      sort of the same image that came into my mind. Do you think GW actually pictures that? I was imagining a trout hatchery, if you've ever been to one. It's a series of artificial pools that allows the fish to move on, as their size increases, into different pools.

      I'm seeing the first pool with the little 2 cell "babies", and progressing to a toddler wading pool, where you can gaff hook a 2 year old to get a fresh spleen.Sweet!

      I do envy the pastoral fetus farming scenario you've laid out. Being an average suburbanite, I get my fetuses at the supermarket on a shrink wrapped styrofoam tray, with who-knows-what hormones and pesticides added.

      Report Abuse
      • Author by zerosumgame0005 (July 24, 2006 11:11 am ET)
           

        to "clear the brush" and cycle around the ranch (falling over security gurads in a normal manner, for him)...

        Report Abuse
      • Author by Easy to refute wingnuts (July 24, 2006 12:57 pm ET)
           

        Into the farm goes an embryo, and out comes an Olympic swimmer.

        Report Abuse
    • Author by IRONY 101 (July 22, 2006 7:56 am ET)
         

      There goes the reality tv series with Paris and Nicole too... say it ain't so.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by fantagor (July 22, 2006 1:24 pm ET)
         

      Until his wife's uterus fell out. The tragedy of it all.

      Report Abuse
      • Author by temphandle brag7loom (July 22, 2006 4:44 pm ET)
           

        ...gonna be a big fetus farm tycoon.

        (Apologies to the late, great Frank Zappa)

        Report Abuse
    • Author by zerochance77 (July 23, 2006 1:25 pm ET)
         

      GOP-voting hilbilly imbeciles will create telephone-game anecdotal tales about unethical doctors (up north in Yankeeland, of course) who maliciously murder "babies" so that they can harvest their cells. It's the same story with partial-birth abortion, human cloning and human-animal hybrids (what, Centaurs & Satyrs? The Minotaur?) people (read: rural, Southern, cross-kissing illiterates) really believe that these things are happening, right now. Just another example of why we should've let the South secede, then it could remain the moral and cultural swamp that they wanted it to be.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by Bear (July 23, 2006 3:04 pm ET)
         

      “OL McBushy had a farm EIEIO, and on this farm he had a fetus, EIEIO with a religious right here, and a WMD there, here a war there a war everywhere a war war. "

      "Old McBushy had a farm EIEIO……”

      Report Abuse
    • Author by mercado (July 23, 2006 4:09 pm ET)
         

      Which states have the most "Fetal Farming",and where does one go to find out if they have Fetal Farms in their state?

      Report Abuse
    • Author by IRONY 101 (July 24, 2006 10:23 am ET)
         

      Blue states.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by rusty shackleford (July 24, 2006 11:45 am ET)
         

      So every single congressperson and senator voted to ban fetal farming. Yet the hysterical "pro-lifers" have been hollering that allowing embryonic stem cell research would drop us down the slippery slope towards fetal farming, the Holocaust, and gosh knows what all else. Guess that slope isn't so slippery, huh?

      Report Abuse
    • Author by Easy to refute wingnuts (July 24, 2006 12:59 pm ET)
         

      Who has to do all the "plowing" required to come up with all these fetuses?

      Report Abuse
    • Author by mefirst (July 24, 2006 1:14 pm ET)
         

      it's fecal farming. limbaugh and fox news have the biggest spreads.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by robrob (July 24, 2006 4:08 pm ET)
         

      Don't they have real things to do?

      Report Abuse
    • Author by atheist (July 24, 2006 4:40 pm ET)
         

      If fetuses can be farmed, then they should be classified as crops, not humans, and therefore abortion isn't a problem.

      Report Abuse

my.MediaMatters.org

Login  Sign Up

Push Back

Phone calls, emails and letters from the public do make a difference. Remember that to be effective you must be polite, and professional. Express your specific concerns regarding that particular news report or commentary, and indicate what you would like the media outlet to do differently in the future.