I read his speech once, and don't have reliable recollection (in general), but a couple points enter my mind at this moment.
One triggered by your comment is the question of oversight. There is federal oversight now of our meat supply and of "good manufacturing practices" for pharmaceutical compounds. My point being that oversight and enforcement of ethical rules can be funded without funding the research. Enforcement can be funded independently from funding research.
Frist used similar sloppy logic in his recent "Terri (Schiavo) letter," I think in the hopes of placating constituents via confusion.
The other comment is based on Frist's assertion yesterday that he has held and expressed this for a long time, and expressed it in his "10 principles for ESCR." The reaction this creates in my gut is distrust of Frist. He's been for ESCR all this time, and was relatively mum about it.
The trouble with oversite is who is on the committee - all too often they reflect the current "men are tools" and "if I can and want to do it, the government should pay me to do it" mindset of scientists.
After all, why should scientists be limited, since they're so much smarter than we are? (and since most don't believe in God or any other higher power above what they call "democracy.")
I agree with you about Frist's stance...
I haven't been a fan of his for awhile, but I respected his effort sometimes...
BUT, he lost me yesterday for sure!