I expect that he will. It would be very odd for him to veto it the first time and not the second. Also, I doubt congress will have the votes to over-turn it this time around, especially in light of this new research. I doubt we'll see federal funding on embryonic stem cells until after '08. Possibly not even then if this alternative proves to be effective.

Actually we already have federal funding on stem cells. Bush ordered it in 2001.

__________________
http://www.fairtax.org

Elminate all taxes on income and replace with a national sales tax.

Hence the key word "embryonic" just before "stem cells" above.

It was on embryonic stem cells.

__________________
http://www.fairtax.org

Elminate all taxes on income and replace with a national sales tax.

This would be something I'm unfamiliar with then. Do you have a link showing Bush supporting funding for embryonic stem cell research?

Keep in mind it was for embryonic stem cells that were already in existence. He vetoed the bill that would allow for creating more embryos for research. Its all in his official policy.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/relea...0060719-6.html

__________________
http://www.fairtax.org

Elminate all taxes on income and replace with a national sales tax.

Yes, it is true that stem cells can come from the womb. But they aren't as good as the ones everyone's making a fuss over. Actually, that's a major understatement. "Not as good" implies that they're slightly inferior. What I mean to say is that what scientists can do with them is limited. Those cells can't cure most of the problems that stem cell research aims to solve. I wish it were true- a non controversial method of helping others with this potentially groundbreaking medicine.

As it is, there's several things that can be used as stem cells, like umbilical chords. But they're just not effective. And refusing to give scientists and doctors the best tools leads to expensive, and frustratingly slow progress.