Washington Editor

WASHINGTON - State funding for embryonic stem cell research is not enough to compensate for the lack of federal support in the space, according to a report just published by the Center for American Progress (CAP).

"We cannot rely on states alone to step in when the federal government fails to act," said John Podesta, the think tank's president and CEO and formerly President Clinton's chief of staff. "In the crucial race to cure deadly illnesses, we need a collaborative approach. We need the federal government back in the game."

His comments came during a discussion on the subject held here Friday. Participants from the highest levels of government and research advised against depending too heavily on state-funded embryonic stem cell research for a range of reasons. Instead, all pointed to a need for backing from the National Institutes of Health as a foundation for long-term funding.

"Without the resources of the federal government," Gov. Jim Doyle (D-Wis.) cautioned, "the research will fall further and further behind."

John Gearhart, the director of stem cell research at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, acknowledged that while "states are important" sources of funding, "it's not going to last forever." That's largely because state budgets simply aren't as robust as that of the federal government, and less basic research is getting funded as a result.

In fact, CAP's analysis showed that state money earmarked for embryonic stem cell research to date mostly has been used to support infrastructure needs because lab facilities, equipment and personnel must be separate from anything supported by federal funds. It "takes an enormous amount of attention" to maintain such separations, said Dave Scadden, the Harvard Stem Cell Institute's co-director. As a result, states must "waste money" on duplicative construction, Doyle said.

In addition, a lack of oversight and authority from the NIH is causing a lack of regulatory uniformity. The resulting decentralized and fragmented research system is not as efficient as the existing federal structure, the CAP report said, and Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) warned of "a patchwork quilt" of regulations with divergent guidelines and standards.

On top of those matters, there are continued fears that scientists will leave the U.S. or avoid entering the research altogether, because of the negative climate surrounding President Bush's 5-year-old policy. Harkin, who labeled the president a "moral dictator," likened his restrictions to "a straitjacket" on research.

That sentiment was echoed by Gearhart, who said the federal policy has delayed advances in the field, even though he conceded that the promise of embryonic stem cells isn't exactly just around the corner. "It's going to be years before clinical applications," he said. "There's a lot to do here, downstream."

While private investments into embryonic stem cell research have gained some traction in concert with state support, Scadden noted that private funding typically is associated with short-term goals and not on par with the kind of long-term commitment still needed.

However, none of the issues raised in the CAP report are intended to discount efforts at the state level. "What's going on in the states is tremendously important," said Bernard Lo, who directs a medical ethics program at the University of California at San Francisco.

To date, seven states have approved funding for stem cell research, and more than $3.6 billion is promised in support. Of that total, about $3 billion would come from California, although lawsuits continue to hold up the flow of that money, and another $486.5 million has been designated by Wisconsin. Also, more states are considering their own stem cell initiatives.

In contrast, the coming NIH budget reserves $608 million for all stem cell research next year. About a quarter of that total is to be directed toward embryonic stem cells, and the remainder is for research into other stem cells. But the group of embryonic stem cell proponents said other areas of stem cell research would not advance as rapidly without parallel investments across the board. "All areas of stem cell research should be pursued, unfettered," Gearhart said.

But with little change in federal policy expected in the near term, CAP recommended a number of short-term fixes: States should seek to adopt standardized guidelines to keep research practices nearly uniform, in addition to ensuring that further funding is directed to embryonic stem cell research.

The group continues its push to modify the current climate, and Harkin expressed optimism that change could come about after the November elections. He added that legislation to expand federal funding for embryonic stem cells, the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act (H.R. 810), would be brought up again next year, in spite of Bush's veto last month.

"I believe that we are going to have more people in the next congress willing to stand up to the president and get this passed," Harkin said, "and I believe we will prevail."