Two weeks ago, Republican leadership in the Minnesota Senate introduced a bill to ban state funding for abortion, and on Monday, two more bills with identical language were introduced in the Senate and another in the Minnesota House.

The text of all three bills reads, “Funding for state-sponsored health programs shall not be used for funding abortions, except to the extent necessary for continued participation in a federal program.”

The bill also includes language that anticipate a court challenge. A ban on state funding for abortion has already been ruled unconstitutional in Minnesota in the case of Doe v. Gomez in 1995.

When the issue originally came up in late-January, reproductive rights advocates said the bill was a distraction.

“Minnesotans know that we have different views on issues like abortion, and even though we may not agree on all points, our state Constitution has made sure all women have had the right to choose for more than 15 years,” said Linnea House, executive director of NARAL Pro-Choice Minnesota. “The anti-choice lawmakers want to focus on this issue at the expense of our state’s other priorities. They are overstepping in trying to force an anti-choice agenda that weakens our state’s Constitution. The budget crisis is critical, which makes it even more unbelievable that some lawmakers are attacking choice.”

She added, “Making the option of abortion accessible to all women did not create a budget crisis. In fact, this is a distraction from the state’s priorities.”

The bills now have 41 sponsors — all Republicans — in the House and Senate combined.

SF 265 was introduced by Republican Sens. Al DeKruif of Madison Lake, Michelle Benson of Ham Lake, Sean Nienow of Cambridge, Benjamin Kruse of Brooklyn Park and Joe Gimse of Willmar.

SF264 was introduced by Republican Sens. Warren Limmer of Maple Grove, John Carlson of Bemidji, LeRoy Stumpf of Plummer, Julie Rosen of Fairmont, and Paul Gazelka, R-Brainerd.

HF391 was introduced by Republican Reps. Peggy Scott of Andover, Ron Shimanski of Silver Lake, Bob Dettmer of Forest Lake, Greg Davids of Preston, Mike LeMieur of Little Falls, Roger Crawford of Mora, Kathy Lohmer of Lake Elmo, Steve Drazkowski of Mazeppa, Mike Benson of Rochester, Bruce Anderson of Buffalo Township, Doug Wardlow of Eagan, King Banaian of St Cloud, Tony Cornish of Good Thunder, Joyce Peppin of Rogers, Mary Franson of Alexandria, Paul Anderson of Starbuck, Joe McDonald of Delano, David Hancock of Bemidji, Tim Sanders of Blaine, Kurt Daudt of Crown, Debra Kiel of Crookston, Rich Murray of Albert Lea, Paul Torkelson of Nelson Township, Rod Hamilton of Mountain Lake, Gene Pelowski of Winona and Mary Liz Holberg of Lakeville.

Photo: MarkDayton.org

NARAL Pro-Choice Minnesota endorsed Mark Dayton, DFL candidate for governor this week. NARAL is a political action group that “uses the political process to guarantee every woman the right to make personal decisions regarding the full range of reproductive choices.” The endorsement comes on the heels of another endorsement by Planned Parenthood of Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota last week.

“We are proud to support a candidate that will be a strong advocate for Minnesota women. I know that he will work tirelessly to protect a woman’s right to choose,” executive director Linnea House said in a statement.

Dayton, in reaction to the endorsement, said, “I am very honored to have the endorsement of NARAL Pro-Choice Minnesota. I have strongly supported a woman’s right to choose throughout my entire career, and am committed to protecting women’s rights if I am elected Governor.”

Rep. Patti Fritz, DFL-Faribault, introduced the amendment to ban taxpayer funding for abortions under GAMC.

“The GAMC program already does pay for and has paid for 60 abortions recently,” Fritz said Thursday.

But that’s incorrect, said Rep. Erin Murphy, DFL-St. Paul. “I want to be crystal clear. GAMC does not cover pregnant women.” she said. “In our legislation one of the categories of eligibility that we are being very clear about: pregnant women go to Medical Assistance.”

Murphy noted that the reason Minnesota’s Catholic bishops had put their support behind the GAMC bill was because abortions aren’t part of the program.

Who is correct? According to the Minnesota Department of Human Services, women who become pregnant while on GAMC are automatically transferred to the state’s Medical Assistance program. They don’t even need to fill out an application.

But, MCCL blurred the lines in their press release about the vote, conflating the two programs.

Taxpayers have been forced to fund abortion procedures done under both GAMC and Medical Assistance (MA), the Minnesota Medicaid program. In 1993, taxpayers paid about $7,000 for 23 abortions performed in cases of rape, incest, or where the life of the mother was in danger. In 2007, taxpayers funded 3,914 abortions at a cost of $1.58 million, according to the Minnesota Department of Human Services; the total since 1994 is 47,115 abortions and $14.1 million.

“Taxpayer funded abortions—forcing citizens to pay for the killing of unborn children—is an issue that rises above partisan and ideological politics,” Fischbach added. “Minnesotans must not be forced to pay abortionists for their destruction of innocent human life.”

The measure failed on a tied vote of 67-67.

Over the weekend, reproductive rights group hailed the defeat of the amendment.

“Anti-choice forces attempted to add an anti-choice amendment to the GAMC bill which that funds our state’s health program for low-income people,” Planned Parenthood of Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota. “Thankfully, this amendment was defeated in a tie vote of 67-67.”

And NARAL Pro-Choice Minnesota sent a similar alert to members. “On Thursday the anti-choice forces introduced an egregious anti-choice amendment to the bill that funds our state’s health program for low-income people,” said the group’s director Linnea House. “That’s right; it was a Stupak/Pitts-type amendment to a program that doesn’t even cover abortion. Fortunately, the amendment was defeated by a tied vote and the bill went on to approval 125 to 9.”

A Positive Alternatives fund recipient that offers inaccurate information about reproductive health on its website

The state of Minnesota is paying for programs that encourage women who are pregnant or think they may be pregnant to forgo abortion. But according to experts, some of these taxpayer-funded programs are intentionally misleading women in crisis by providing inaccurate information about reproductive health options. And a large amount of money in the program goes to overtly religious organizations, some that include Bible study among their grant-funded activities.

The Positive Alternatives Act was passed in 2005, due to pressure from the lobbying group Minnesota Citizens Concerned for Life, and provides $2.5 million per year in funding for “abortion alternatives” programs, the majority of which goes to crisis pregnancy centers or CPCs. Minnesota is one of only 10 states that provide such funding.

A Minnesota Independent survey of information provided by CPCs demonstrates that the taxpayer is often footing the bill for information that contradicts mainstream scientific and public health experts.

“Birth control causes abortion”

One such CPC is the St. Croix Valley Life Care Center (SCVLCC) in Stillwater, which receives $295,751 each year in direct grants from the state.

SCVLCC says on its website that it does not dispense birth control pills because they damage the body and cause abortions:

The pill and other forms of hormonal contraception can cause unhealthy side effects ranging from mild to serious… It could also be causing damage to your fertility in ways that may affect your ability to get pregnant later, should you want to. It also has abortifacient properties.

The site’s mention of emergency contraception carries a similar warning:

The morning after pill is several times the dose of one birth control pill. This can do serious damage to your fertility or, at the very least, leave you feeling ill. It can increase your risk of an ectopic pregnancy should you become pregnant after taking the morning after pill. It also has abortifacient properties and if implantation has already occurred it could cause an early abortion.

SCLCC then describes the process by which birth-control medications work and concludes with this warning: “This process is known as a chemical abortion and is why the Pill is referred to as an abortifacient.”

But nearly every major medical association has said just the opposite. According to the American Academy of Pediatrics guide for practitioners [pdf], “Emergency contraception does not interrupt a pregnancy that has already implanted in the uterine lining.” In fact, the organization acknowledges the high amount of misinformation floating around and suggests to clinicians that “education on the mechanism of emergency contraception often helps to answer questions or concerns of individual patients.”

It says not only that emergency contraception doesn’t cause abortions, but that it has the potential to decrease the number of them. “It is estimated that appropriate use of emergency contraception could reduce the number of unintended pregnancies each year by half and thereby similarly reduce the abortion rate.”

The American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists also confirms that emergency contraception does not cause abortion and is, in fact, the same medication used for couples trying to conceive artificially:

Emergency contraception will not disrupt an established pregnancy. Women often are exposed to exogenous hormones in early pregnancy without adverse outcome. Some women undergoing assisted reproductive technology procedures to achieve pregnancy are routinely prescribed progesterone to support the pregnancy.

The American College of Physicians says [pdf] that pharmacies and other entities that don’t carry the morning-after pill for ideological reasons are defeating that purpose: “Ironically, this policy may indirectly increase the number of unintended pregnancies and induced abortions.”

Providing misinformation

These groups are doing more harm than good, says Linnea House of NARAL Minnesota. “I do have a lot of concerns,” she said. “These are organizations that are providing misinformation, especially to women who are in crisis.”

And St. Croix Valley Life Care Center is not the only state-funded agency that disseminates questionable claims about birth control.

Health Resources Life Care Center in Fergus Falls receives $149,998 annually and similarly offers information on its website that states that “an abortion will occur” if a patient takes emergency contraception. As does the Highland LifeCare Center in St. Paul: “This causes an already fertilized egg to be expelled from the womb, causing an early abortion.”

The Northside Life Care Center in Minneapolis, which receives $124,980 in state funds annually, says it doesn’t provide birth control. “No. Artificial methods of birth control have many risks and side effects. Many of them also cause early abortions. We recommend natural family planning for those who are married and chastity for those who are not married.”

National controversy

In order for programs to receive Positive Alternatives money, they have to have been founded before 2005, and most were set up by anti-abortion or religious groups in the 1980s and 1990s. They have come under fierce criticism from pro-choice activists who say CPCs misrepresent themselves as health clinics and provide false information about abortion and contraception. Some communities have begun passing laws requiring CPCs to provide full disclosure about the nature of the information they provide.

House says NARAL Minnesota has been watching these organizations closely. And her group is not alone.

The Baltimore City Council passed an ordinance regulating CPCs that went into effect Jan. 1. The law says that CPCs must inform all clients that they do not provide medically accurate reproductive health information. “It’s a step towards making sure that women have the information they need to make the right decision for their health and their future,” Council President Stephanie Rawlings-Blake said when the bill passed.

House said that other communities are contemplating similar measures.

Arguing against contraception

The rejection of birth control at the CPCs means that even condoms are targeted.

Helping Hand Pregnancy Center, Inc., in Worthington receives $150,000 annually from the Minnesota Department of Health and says abstinence is the only option.

“Abstaining from sexual activity is the only 100% guarantee you have to avoid pregnancy and to avoid contracting an STI,” the center’s website says . “If you feel that you are not ready to have sex, or if you do not want to put yourself at risk for pregnancy or an STI, then abstinence is your best choice.”

The website claims that “[c]onsistent condom use 100% of the time during vaginal sex reduces your risk for HIV by 85%.”

Helping Hand doesn’t offer a source for that information, but numerous studies have shown condoms to be highly effective at preventing HIV infection. According to the World Health Organization:

The most convincing data on the effectiveness of condoms in preventing HIV infection has been generated by prospective studies undertaken on serodiscordant couples, when one partner is infected with HIV and the other is not. These studies show that, with consistent condom use, the HIV infection rate among uninfected partners was less than 1 percent per year.

Abortion and breast cancer risk

Birthline, which is based in St. Cloud and receives $147,730 per year, says that abortion can increase the risk of breast cancer.

Carrying a pregnancy to full term gives protection against breast cancer that cannot be gained if abortion is chosen. Abortion causes a sudden drop in estrogen levels that may make breast cells more susceptible to cancer. Most studies conducted so far show a significant linkage between abortion and breast cancer.

Cancer.gov, the government’s clearinghouse for cancer research, flatly contradicts that: “[S]tudies consistently showed no association between induced and spontaneous abortions and breast cancer risk.”

In fact, research shows the opposite of Birthline’s claims. “Breast cancer risk is increased for a short time after a full-term pregnancy,” according to the American Cancer Society.

Separation of church and state

Many of the programs funded by the Minnesota Department of Health are religious in nature, some overtly so.

One, Elizabeth House in Worthington, which receives $149,625, says its mission is to “assist families to overcome the obstacles in their lives through the power of the Lord Jesus Christ.”

The state funds the program’s “life skills” classes that offer “optional bible classes.”

The North Region Pregnancy Care Center in Roseau gets $56,595 per year. It describes itself as a “Christian, pro-life ministry proclaiming the Gospel of Jesus Christ by providing a network of care to those experiencing pregnancy related issues and by compassionately presenting Biblical truth resulting in changed lives to the glory of God.”

The Highland LifeCare Center in St. Paul “believes that each person is made in the image and likeness of God. We encourage and demonstrate respect for human life by promoting sexual purity and by serving those facing the challenges of unplanned pregnancies, before and after their children’s births.”

Worthington’s Helping Hand Pregnancy Center is a “Christian, non-profit ministry that provides practical pregnancy related help to women, men, and babies and provides abstinence-only education in our communities.”

St. Cloud’s Birthline is a “Christian organization dedicated to serving any person with an unexpected or challenging pregnancy by providing physical, emotional and spiritual assistance as well as programs and referrals reflecting the inherent dignity of all human life.”

Birthline’s website contains prayers related to pregnancy and abortion.

With massive budget deficits in recent years, Minnesota legislators have targeted such funding in order to help fix the budget gap. In 2007 and 2008, attempts were made to cut the Positive Alternatives program, but ultimately Gov. Tim Pawlenty — who has championed the program — and anti-abortion legislators prevailed.

House says that government should fund medically accurate programs and mentioned that several Positive Alternatives programs, such as Face to Face Health and Counseling Service in St. Paul, give women accurate health information about birth control and contraception.

“We expect hospitals or transportation projects using state funds to do their work accurately, taxpayers should expect the same from health programs,” she said.

“In tough economic times, we should make sure that state funding is going to programs that provide accurate health information, not one that has an ideological bent.”

Photo: Chris Steller

Saying it protects the free market, U.S. Sen. Al Franken sounded optimistic in a speech today about the chances for preserving net neutrality by law. “For the first time, it looks like we might actually do this,” Franken told the Future of Music Coalition in Washington, D.C.

In his speech (pdf), Franken laid out the problem this way:

Right now, a blog loads just as quickly as a corporate webpage. … But recently, business executives from top ISPs have declared their interest in offering, quote, “prioritized” Internet service to companies who can pay for it. … That would transform the Internet from a free, open, and competitive playing field into a “pay-for-play” arena in which citizen bloggers, nonprofits, and small businesses are simply outgunned by major media conglomerates.

The stakes are high, Franken said:

As noisy and messy as it may be, the Internet is a democracy. And because of that, it is a critical part of our democracy. But, in the absence of strong legislation prohibiting ISPs from regulating content, that may not always be the case.

Net neutrality is especially important to people in rural areas who don’t have a choice of internet service providers, Franken said, and to people with unpopular ideas — ideas that are unpopular with their ISPs, anyway:

First, you may remember that in 2007, Verizon refused to allow the pro-choice group NARAL to send text messages to its supporters – even though they had signed up to receive them. Verizon’s explanation was that it had the right to block “controversial or unsavory” messages. Like, for example, that a woman should have control of her reproductive system. …

It is a twenty-first century reiteration of one of our most important constitutional rights – the right to free speech.

And it doesn’t interfere with the free market. It protects the free market.

Franken’s confidence arises from support he sees at the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), the White House, Congress, and even the U.S. Supreme Court, where he probed now-Justice Sonia Sotomayor on the issue during her confirmation hearings before the Senate Judiciary Committee. He mentioned that today:

I asked her specifically about whether she thought that the American public has a compelling First Amendment interest in ensuring the Internet stays open and accessible. And if I could paraphrase her answer, it was “yes.”

Such is the life of a senator: only Sunday he shared a stage in Minneapolis with the president of Somalia, Sharif Sheik Ahmed, and today he’s on stage in the nation’s capital with the bassist of R.E.M., Mike Mills.

That was good for a few cracks from Franken about Mills’ little-known band: “I’ve had my eye on these guys, REM, and they’re going to take off — you just watch.”

But Franken made no mention of an R.E.M. song that Mills is said to have written, “What’s the Frequency, Kenneth?” The song was inspired by the 1986 attack on former CBS anchorman Dan Rather in which the question in the song’s title was hurled at Rather by his assailants — one of whom allegedly suffered from the belief that TV networks were trying to control him.

If the group’s assertion is correct, the programs cost taxpayers more than $200,000 per woman successfully treated.

Data released by the Minnesota Department of Health show a slight drop in abortions among women on medical assistance between 2006 and 2007, the most current year that data is available. Medical providers were reimbursed by the state for 3,914 procedures in 2007 compared to 3,937 in 2006, a drop of 0.6 percent.

MCCL says Positive Alternatives, a state program that encourages women to carry their pregnancy to term, was responsible for the decrease.

Positive Alternatives awards grants to 37 groups, many of which are religion-based. The Highland LifeCare Center, Inc., in St. Paul, for example, tells pregnant women, “Having an abortion may affect more than just your body and your mind — it may have an impact on your relationship with God. What is God’s desire for you in this situation? How does God see your unborn child? These are important questions to consider.”

In a press release titled, “Positive Alternatives helped to save lives, reduce taxpayer funded abortions in 2007,” MCCL executive director Scott Fischbach said, “Positive Alternatives is making a real difference for pregnant women in need. The DHS report is more proof that women are receiving the help they need to successfully face the challenges of unexpected pregnancy without resorting to abortion.”

But reproductive health advocates aren’t buying that reasoning.

“MCCL’s statement … is disingenuous at best and is probably due to a decrease in unintended pregnancies,” said Linnea House, executive director of NARAL Pro-Choice Minnesota.

House added that if MCCL is correct, then the figures demonstrate a colossal cost to taxpayers. The difference between 2006 and 2007 is 23 abortions among low-income women, and the Positive Alternatives program costs $4.75 million every two years, she pointed out.

“Their numbers show that this is an investment of $206,521 per woman,” said House. “By comparison, an investment in family planning programs, programs the MCCL has consistently fought against, helps nearly 50,000 women and every dollar invested will save the state at least $5 in return.”

Kathi Di Nicola, communications director for Planned Parenthood Minnesota, North Dakota and South Dakota, agreed that the decrease is more likely attributable to family planning programs.

“We would attribute the decrease to fewer unintended pregnancies, which is likely the result of increased access to affordable, accessible family planning,” she said.

“One year’s data does not constitute a trend, but it is encouraging news for family planning providers,” she added.

House said the most effective state programs are those that prevent pregnancy in the first place.

“We know that family planning programs prevent unintended pregnancies and actually save the taxpayer money,” she said.

(Sources: Minnesota Historical Society, Wikipedia)

A simple but powerful reproductive health bill is up for consideration in the Minnesota Legislature this year, and it has anti-abortion activists concerned. The Minnesota Reproductive Privacy Act (SF 115) states that the government has no business interfering with the constitutionally protected privacy rights set forth in Roe v. Wade. Anti-abortion advocates say this law would cripple their efforts to make abortion illegal, while reproductive rights proponents say this bill not only protects women’s privacy but also their lives.

The bill reads, in part: “The state may not deny or interfere with a woman’s right to choose to bear a child, to terminate a pregnancy before viability, to terminate a pregnancy after viability when termination is necessary to protect the life or health of the woman, or discriminate against the exercise of rights set forth in clause in the regulation or provision of benefits, facilities, services, or information.”

The Reproductive Privacy Act was introduced at the end of the 2007-08 session and did not leave committee. This year, the bill has the support of two contenders for the state’s top office. Presumed gubernatorial candidates Sens. John Marty and Tom Bakk are among the five coauthors. Sens. Scott Dibble, Sandy Pappas and Ellen Anderson are also authors.

Staunchly pro-life Gov. Tim Pawlenty is unlikely to sign such a bill should it reach his desk.

Anti-abortion groups say that could jeopardize their efforts to end abortion in Minnesota. “The Reproductive Privacy Act is a giant step backward in the effort to protect unborn children and their mothers from an aggressive, predatory and profit-driven abortion industry,” Scott Fischbach of Minnesota Citizens Concerned for Life told anti-abortion news outlet Lifesite.com. “Removing all limits on a deadly industry in decline is a stimulus package that Minnesotans don’t want.”

Supporters of the bill say that protecting privacy rights from government intervention is crucial to preventing the erosion of those rights — and preventing the deaths of women.

“The difference between a society with legal abortion and one without is not about the number of abortions performed, but is about the number of women’s lives saved,” said Linnea House, executive director of NARAL Pro Choice Minnesota. “The goal of this bill is to ensure that we continue to protect women’s lives.”

When reproductive health care is restricted, women pay the price, says House. “In countries without access to safe and legal reproductive health care, women suffer from infertility or die as a direct result of illegal, unsafe and unsanitary abortions. We also know that in countries where abortion is illegal, there is not always a decrease in abortion rates; there is, however, an increase in the number of women dying from unsafe medical procedures.”

The bill would make it more difficult for the state to continue waiting period laws or for reproductive health care workers with religious objections to decline to provide services.

A fat cat lights up in the new DCCC ad

While the country turned its fickle eyes to Minnesota’s suddenly compelling 6th Congressional District contest, the race for the state’s 3rd District didn’t stop being hot. Over the last two days, both major parties’ congressional committees unveiled new TV ads. Big male guns vouched for the Republican candidate, state Rep. Erik Paulsen, and big female guns tried to widen a gender gap in favor of DFLer Ashwin Madia — while heaping derision on another female office-holder, state Rep. Michele Bachmann. All this and more, with video and details about tonight’s candidate debate in Edina, after the jump.

Candidate debate tonight

Independence Party candidate David Dillon will join Paulsen and Madia on stage at Edina High School’s Fick Auditorium tonight, Wednesday, Oct. 22, at 8 p.m. for a debate sponsored by Debate Minnesota. Click here for directions to the event at 6754 Valleyview Road, Edina.

Both major parties’ congressional committees on TV again

When last heard from in the 3rd District race, the National Republican Campaign Committee was canceling reservations for TV ad time one week after the next. Now they’re back in the game with a new ad called “Running to Raise Taxes” that bashes Madia on Paulsen’s behalf. The NRCC shelled out $96,500 for spots this week on KMSP and KSTP, and another $350,000 for spots next week through Election Day on those stations plus WCCO, according to MPR’s TV ad database.

The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee continues to roll out TV ads attacking Paulsen. The latest is called “Our Tax Dollars for Their Cash Bonuses.”

Paulsen’s ad slammed

Meanwhile, the Paulsen campaign’s own new ad earned a D grade in a “Truth Test” evaluation by KSTP’s Tom Hauser, who called its claims “misleading” and “false.” Ironically, Hauser cites distortions in how Paulsen mixes and matches quotes and images from harsh evaluations Hauser himself gave earlier to ads produced by Madia and the DCCC.  He also calls out Paulsen for quoting a Madia statement on taxes out of context, as MnPublius caught early on.

Men for Paulsen, Women for Madia

Many prominent hands gripped podiums on Monday in separate press events for Paulsen and Madia. Perhaps as striking as the speakers’ prominence was the sharp gender split that mirrors a gender gap that’s growing in recent polls. Gov. Tim Pawlenty and U.S. Rep. John Kline were part of a seven-man team at the state Capitol vouching for Paulsen’s record on veterans. Across town in Bloomington, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, U.S. Sen. Amy Klobuchar and Minnesota House Speaker Margaret Anderson Kelliher were kicking off (somewhat belatedly?) a campaign called Women for Madia. The boy-girl split on those two panels reflected a gender gap in voter support for Madia and Paulsen revealed in the latest SurveyUSA poll: Men back Paulsen by a margin of 51–37 percentage points, while women favor Madia by a margin of 51–40 percentage points. It’s a gap that’s grown slightly since an earlier survey by the same organization in late August, and possibly could have widened further with Pelosi’s visit — had her criticism of Bachmann not eclipsed the Women for Madia message. 

(The Republican male lineup is on view in a Paulsen campaign video. MPR has a whopping nine audio clips from Monday’s dueling press events.)

And as if on cue, NARAL Pro-Choice America declared this to be “Ashwin Madia Week,” one of a series of “Race of the Week” fundraising and attention-raising efforts. Here’s how a spokesperson described it in a statement sent to the Minnesota Independent:

NARAL Pro-Choice America will drop a total of four mail pieces and our volunteers will make calls in support of pro-choice Ashwin Madia. Madia’s record on a woman’s right to choose is far superior to that of his opponent’s and we look forward to working with him when he becomes a congressman. NARAL Pro-Choice America will do everything we can to make sure that’s possible. While we can’t confirm the amount of donations we drive to a campaign with our blog posts, we can confirm that NARAL Pro-Choice America PAC has sent the maximum amount allowed by the FEC to his campaign. Our PAC is funded by our members so they pay close attention to our endorsements and “Race of the Week” picks. Our political director routinely receives calls from members and activists about candidates and races to support throughout the country and we always make sure to mention Ashwin Madia’s race.

No, on the surface there was nothing different about this year’s event. And yet there it was, a sort of steady thrum that filled the air. If you closed your eyes, you could feel the difference. It felt just a little like hope.Roe v. Wade was decided 35 years ago next Tuesday, and it’s been under attack for at least that long. From the day that Justice Harry Blackmun penned the majority opinion, anti-abortion forces have been working hard to undermine it, if not destroy it. And they’ve had no small degree of success. There are no abortion providers in 87 percent of American counties and three entire states. In Minnesota, 95 percent of counties have no abortion clinics within their borders. Add to this the recent Gonzales v. Carhart ruling, which outlawed abortions performed by intact dilation and extraction, and you could forgive pro-choice advocates for being down.

But the 2006 elections brought a bit of hope for the first time in more than a decade. Both nationally and here in Minnesota, more pro-choice politicians were elected. And this fall will bring a strong opportunity to elect a pro-choice president for the first time in eight years. These developments have raised the hope that maybe, just maybe, pro-choice advocates are finally on offense again.

‘Working hard for choice’

That doesn’t mean that the activists gathered here are sanguine. Jessica Valenti, the author of “Full Frontal Feminism” and editor of Femnisting is tonight’s emcee, and she states flatly, “Since Roe was won in 1973, women and men have been working to fight for choice.” She cites the dispiriting stats on abortion availability as reasons to fight.

And Dr. Carrie Ann Terrell of the University of Minnesota’s Women’s Health Center, said that abortion clinic workers were still facing threats, attacks and even death. “Despite our successes,” she said, “we still suffer at the hands of extremists.”

But despite the nods to imperfection, the evening was dominated by good cheer and a convivial atmosphere, which was buoyed by the address of the keynote speaker, former Surgeon General Jocelyn Elders.

Elders, of course, was defenestrated from the Clinton administration after supporting sex education. During her tenure, she was asked if children should be taught about masturbation as part of sex education. Elders, characteristically blunt, replied, “I think that it is part of human sexuality, and perhaps it should be taught.” For this grave sin, Elders was cast out of the Clinton administration. Meanwhile, 99.99 percent of America’s post-pubescent youth managed to discover masturbation all on their own. The system works. It just doesn’t work well.

‘Many women would rather die than remain pregnant’

Elders spoke passionately of her time as a doctor in pre-Roe Little Rock, Ark. “Many women would rather die than remain pregnant,” she said, speaking of a time when 17 percent of deaths in pregnancy were related to complications from abortion. “Prior to Roe v. Wade, the most common cause of death in pregnancy was botched abortion. And black women were five times more likely to die” of complications from illegal abortions, Elders said. 

Elders, who today is a professor of pediatrics at the University of Arkansas, also called for increased funding for reproductive health and education. “I have never known a woman who needed an abortion who wasn’t already pregnant,” Elders said. “But what the politicians in the federal government have done is aborted common sense.”

“Instead of supporting contraception, they say we’re going to have abstinence until marriage when the mean age of marriage is 27 years old,” said Elders. “We refuse to educate the most valuable resource we have, our children. All we’ve done is set them up for getting what we say we don’t want.” Mocking people who argue against distributing condoms in school because “condoms can break,” Elders said witheringly, “Condoms will break, but the vows of abstinence will break easier.”

“We’ve got to do better at making sure all women have access [to reproductive health care],” Elders said, and she said that a lack of access fell disproportionately on “the young, the uneducated and women of color.”

‘Dancing with a bear’

Elders also said she supported “comprehensive health education in schools from kindergarten to 12th grade.” She added, “The best contraception in the world is an educated woman.”

Elders added it was a mistake to view sex as something evil. She said that sex was important for procreation and that it was important to use protection, but that “the most important piece about sex, is it’s about pleasure — 99.9 percent of sex is about pleasure.” Elders added, “We are sexual beings.”

And Elders reminded the audience that she might have had a point about teaching teens about masturbation.

“I may have been fired for talking about masturbation,” she said, “but it won’t make you go blind, won’t make you go crazy, won’t give you a disease, and you know you’re always having sex with someone who loves you” –  a line that brought down the house.

Elders ended with a message of hope, relating a story that a minister had told her.

” ‘You’re dancing with a bear,’ he told me, ‘And when you dance with a bear, you can’t get tired and sit down. You’ve gotta wait ’til the bear gets tired,’ ” Elders said. She then told the crowd, “You’re dancing with a bear, but he’s getting a little tired.”

NARAL’s annual “Who Decides?” report gave Minnesota a C-plus for overall access to abortion services, finding that 95 percent of counties do not have an abortion provider and noting state restrictions on abortion services, such as parental notification requirements, and a ban on funding for abortion referrals. 

But in an interview with Minnesota Monitor, NARAL president Nancy Keenan said that 2008 represents a good opportunity to move forward.“You elect pro-choice individuals, you’re going to see pro-choice measures,” Keenan said, noting that the 2006 elections had resulted in fewer attempts to restrict abortion rights, and more expansion and funding of reproductive health. “In 2007 we saw 28 states enacted about 80 pro-choice measures.  That’s good news.”

Melissa Reed, NARAL’s political director for Minnesota, agreed.

“The 2007 legislative session was unlike any we’d seen in a generation,” said Reed, noting that the 2006 cycle had brought more pro-choice legislators into Minnesota government. “The family planning program was designated by [Gov. Tim] Pawlenty for a 50 percent cut in 2007.  We were able to block that cut.”

Instead, the Legislature restored funding to the levels under former Gov. Arne Carlson, Reed said.

Reed noted that the Legislature also was able to push through a new law that requires hospitals to provide emergency contraception for victims of sexual assault.

“Minnesota is only the 13th state with a law like that,” Reed noted.

Keenan said that NARAL was seeking a “protect and elect” strategy in 2008, to build on gains in 2006.

“We see this as a huge opportunity in 2008,” Keenan said.  “Even though there’s a pro-choice leadership basically in the [U.S.] House and the Senate, we don’t have a working majority.”

Keenan said that NARAL was happy with all of the Democratic presidential candidates, and that she was “really confident that we’re going to elect a pro-choice president.”

Keenan also said that Sen. Norm Coleman, R-Minn., would be a target in the fall.

“I think Coleman is very vulnerable,” Keenan said.  “You’re seeing a shift in that state that people are wanting the divisiveness to stop, they want solutions, and they see the hypocrisy that he wants to outlaw abortion, but he’s not doing anything to reduce unwanted pregnancy.  I think he’s out of touch.”

Reed added that NARAL would be targeting legislative gains to increase the pro-choice majority in the Minnesota Legislature.

Reed said suburban cities such as Richfield and Bloomington, which have been traditionally viewed as conservative bastions, would be targets in the upcoming election.

“We’re looking at some of those first- and second-ring districts that for years were discounted,” she said.