N.J. stem cell project lags

PRINCETON BOROUGH - It has been well over a year since then-Gov. James E. McGreevey signed into law a bill authorizing stem cell research in New Jersey, following the bill's passage by a single-vote margin in the Assembly.

But having passed that first significant hurdle, supporters of the measure have waged an uphill battle to launch a state-sponsored institute that would provide funds for the research.

Yesterday, acting Gov. Richard J. Codey still held out the hope that the state will back research on stem cells, although gaping holes in the budget make the likelihood of significant advances uncertain in the short term.

In a lunchtime speech yesterday at a symposium held by Princeton University, Codey said the state expected to break ground this August on a $150 million Stem Cell Research Institute. Because the Bush administration has forbidden federal funding for research on newly created embryonic stem cell lines, experiments using them cannot take place in laboratories that receive federal grants.

Codey also expressed support for a $230 million bond initiative, which voters here would have to approve, for research grants.

"Crafting this proposal is not easy," he said, in listing just a few of the administrative steps the institute would have to take to ensure its credibility with the public.

He noted, for example, that the state would have to set up an ethics panel to oversee research and named Harold Shapiro, Princeton's former president, as its head. The institute would also need to set up an independent panel of scientific experts to score applications for grants.

Some of the Californians who were instrumental in crafting a successful ballot initiative in that state bringing $3 billion in research and administrative funds for stem cell research described their experience at yesterday's symposium on the policy and economic issues states face in seeking to fund scientific research.

Paul Berg, the Nobel Prize-winning professor emeritus from Stanford University, was among those giving advice yesterday. He described that state's efforts to create a large, diverse board of trustees to oversee the research institute and to set up a panel of scientists from outside the state to review grant proposals.

He also warned against enlisting political support by promising immediate results in finding therapies for diseases.

"There is a fine line between promising the world and being realistic," Berg said. "How long will it take? A reputable scientist would say, `I have no idea.' "

Supporters of this research believe it will yield therapies for debilitating diseases such as Parkinson's and diabetes, among others.

Roger Noll, an economics professor at Stanford, suggested that state-sponsored projects should pursue research "with a high social value but low commercial value." The private sector, he said, will fund research that promises "short-term payoffs."

In warning that social conservatives "are poised to define the boundaries of research," Berg urged scientists and supporters of unfettered research to pursue what he called their "freedom of inquiry," which he linked to the First Amendment right to free speech.

Codey has stated his views on the moral implications of stem cell research bluntly.

"I believe that, as a society - and a government - we have an obligation to help those among us who are suffering. If we have an opportunity to save lives, we must pursue it. And stem cell research is that opportunity," Codey said yesterday.

A practicing Catholic, he dismissed concerns over experimentation on leftover embryos from fertility clinics as wrong-headed.

"Opponents say stem cell research takes lives. They want you to believe that any embryo used for stem cell research would have developed into a person. That is just plain wrong," Codey said in the speech, adding, "Let us be clear about this. These are embryos that if not for stem cell research would be discarded. Using them to potentially save lives is the morally correct thing to do."

A poll earlier this year found that a majority of New Jerseyans - 68 percent - support research on stem cells, the undifferentiated cells created days after an egg's fertilization that later develop into the body's various tissues. The number declined, however, to just under half, when asked whether they wanted to fund it.

Indeed, a spokesman for Assembly Democrats said a ballot measure like California's is unlikely this year.

"Attempts to pass a bond referendum for stem cell research would be very difficult this year in this fiscal climate," spokesman Joe Donnelly said.

Democrats are also not in agreement on how to set up the research. Assemblyman Neil Cohen, D-Roselle, a sponsor of the stem cell bill, said he favored as little government administration as possible.

"We need to connect researchers with the private sector," Cohen said.

Tom Vincz, a spokesman for the state Treasury, said the use of bond revenues backed by state cigarette taxes to build the research institute must be approved by the Legislature.