Senator Eliot Shapleigh - El Paso, Texas

In the high-stakes race for the next biotechnology breakthrough, one that will produce a cure for cancer or Parkinson's disease or some other debilitating malady, politics matter.

They matter enough that the $3 billion cancer research initiative announced by Gov. Rick Perry, cycling champion Lance Armstrong and others this week could hang in the balance. Top researchers believe that research using embryonic stem cells hold the best prospect for those breakthroughs, but Perry and some legislators oppose any state funding for such research.

There is an international arms race underway for the world's top researchers, with various states and nations bidding for the best scientific minds. Those minds are expected to lead the way to enormous advances in medicine, which will spawn an industry generating wealth, jobs, tax base and acclaim.

Texas' initiative, which would pour $300 million a year into cancer research for a decade, is part of that arms race. California, New York and New Jersey are also in the hunt for the world's best researchers and laboratories, as are Japan, South Korea and Singapore.

It's a tight market, so if Perry and the state Legislature restrict research on embryonic stem cells by policy or law, Texas could lose out. Many top scientists won't go where their work is inhibited by law or politics.

State Sen. Kirk Watson, D-Austin, is among the lawmakers working on the cancer research plan and he understands that Texas is in a stiff competition. "We need to make sure we are open for all research," said Watson, a cancer survivor. "We need to focus on the possibilities, not the limitations."

Former state Comptroller John Sharp, leading the group studying how to make the initiative a reality, said a ban on stem-cell research is "the elephant in the room." But he believes cancer research is bigger than the stem-cell debate and any official animus towards it.

Dr. Kenneth Shine, executive vice-chancellor for health affairs at the University of Texas System, agrees that cancer research embraces a wide spectrum that doesn't necessarily include stem cells. The advantage of so much state research money will be attactive by itself, though Shine acknowledges that leading researchers don't like prohibitions. "Scientists would like to see the broadest range of opportunities to take the research where it leads."

Stem cells could be the replacement cells for organs damaged by cancer, and millions of dollars have been earmarked for cancer research using stem cells. Banning such research could cripple Texas' plan to become a world leader in finding a cure for cancer — and the great economic boom that would follow.

Robert Klein, chairman of the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine, said about 30 notable scientists have come to California in the past 12 months to work with stem cells. Although California's $3 billion fund for stem cell research has been stymied by lawsuits, universities and research institutes continue to push forward with stem cell work.

"Those other states and nations know that if they are going to participate," Klein said, "they must participate at our level. So they have tremendous pressure to either completely drop out of the field or immediately bring in the public or private dollars to participate at our level."

Texas should be in the running for this ideal economy — a clean industry that produces wealth, work and potential life-saving health benefits. But it won't be if it restricts research by refusing to fund work on embryonic stem cells.

If that happens, the best researchers will make their breakthroughs elsewhere, and Texas may have little to show for its huge investment.