He did vote NO on the Human Cloning Prohibition Act, but as with many of his votes, one needs to understand a bit deeper who he is and how he votes.
I would direct you to this answer from one of the debates. He doesn't look at the government as the savior from all issues. If government didn't fund ESCR, would it even exist?
Q: Would you expand federal funding of embryonic stem cell research?
A: Programs like this are not authorized under the Constitution. The trouble with issues like this is, in Washington we either prohibit it or subsidize it. And the market should deal with it, and the states should deal with it.
Source: 2007 GOP primary debate, at Reagan library, hosted by MSNBC May 3, 2007
Pro-lifers should be fiercely loyal to this system of federalism, because the very same Constitution that created the federal system also asserts the inalienable right to life. In this way, our constitutional system closely links federalism to the fundamental moral rights to life, liberty, and property. For our Founders it was no exaggeration to say federalism is the means by which life, as well as liberty and property, are protected in this nation. This is why the recent direction of the pro-life cause is so disturbing.This is why I don't support the Federal Amendments for marriage and against abortion. They don't belong at the federal level. Taking it to the federal level got us in this mess (see Roe v. Wade).
Pro-life forces have worked for the passage of bills that disregard the federal system, such as the Unborn Victims of Violence Act, the federal cloning ban, and the Child Custody Protection Act. Each of these bills rested on specious constitutional grounds and undermined the federalism our Founders recognized and intended as the greatest protection of our most precious rights.