mr. speaker , let me begin by joining the various members of this institution who will speak today and who will urge the passage of both of these bills . 
i certainly can not speak with the particular passion of the gentlewoman from california ( ms. matsui ) xz4006631 who has been touched by this issue , but this is a very good day for the house of representatives . 
it is a very good day , because we have managed to reach across the partisan divides , i believe twice today , or we will manage to reach across the partisan divide , i believe twice today , to pass bills that are good for the american people and good for countless numbers of americans who need this research . 
i want to say something about the cord blood bill in particular . 
i have had the honor for 2 years of working with the gentleman from new jersey ( mr. smith ) xz4003801 on this bill , and i am a democratic sponsor on it ; and i want to thank him for his good work . 
this bill will make an enormous difference to the african americans around this country who often struggle with blood matches . 
cord bloods do not require a blood match . 
the young man that we saw on the cannon terrace yesterday who suffered from sickle cell anemia whose life has been permanently transformed by cord blood cell technology speaks to the power of this bill . 
we talk a great deal about health care disparities , and we ought to talk about health care disparities in this country ; but rather than talk , this bill acts . 
it actually provides relief for a group of people who otherwise would not have seen it . 
but i want to talk for just a moment about the concept of principled difference , because i think it is very much illustrated today . 
mr. speaker , the reason that this cord blood bill made it to the floor is in large measure because rather than digging in in opposition to stem cell opposition , as strongly as the gentleman from new jersey ( mr. smith ) xz4003801 feels about this issue , rather than digging in in opposition , the gentleman worked with the scientific community , he worked across the aisle to try to find another approach . 
and as circumstance has it , both of these approaches are before us today . 
if we would somehow as an institution learn from his example , if we figured out how , rather than digging in and deciding how much we disagree with each other , what other ways exist , what ways can we find to work together , we would not have a 34 percent approval rating as an institution . 
the final point that i will make is that i firmly believe that we have all of our genius and all of our brilliance as a scientific and medical community for a very good reason . 
i think that we are meant to use it . 
i am hopeful that all of the technological advances that have happened in the last several years , with cord blood cells and with stem cells , can make a significant difference . 
so to all the members of this institution , i simply urge them and encourage them to vote for both of these bills but , even more importantly , to accept this as an example of what happens when democrats and republicans find intelligent common ground . 
there will be people who will benefit from this , and i do not think it is going too far to say that lives will be saved because of these two bills . 
so i thank the gentleman from new jersey ( mr. smith ) xz4003801 for his good work and , again , i am honored to be the lead democratic sponsor of the cord blood bill . 
