Advocates for reproductive rights are concerned that new socially conservative leadership in the Minnesota Legislature could curtail those rights in the upcoming biennium. While Republicans, who’ll control both houses come January, say that jobs and the economy will come first, there’s little doubt that they’ll also press for restrictions on abortion within the next two years — especially with Sen. Michele Fischbach as President of the Senate. Fischbach’s husband, Scott, is the executive director of Minnesota’s largest anti-abortion group, Minnesota Citizens Concerned for Life.

Tim Stanley, senior director of government public affairs at Planned Parenthood Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota, said that his group will be playing defense. “The social conservatives have taken over the Senate and its leadership. Now they dominate both legislative bodies and have the ability to set the agenda,” he said. “Because they are in power and can set the agenda, this changes the dynamic and tools they have at their disposal. We are committed to protecting the hard-won gains of Minnesota women and families in the year ahead.”

In other states, including Colorado, North Dakota and South Dakota, social conservatives have tried constitutional amendments to grant “personhood” status to fertilized eggs. Stanley said such an effort would go too far in Minnesota.

“I think any legislation or constitutional amendment that broad that would affect literally thousands of Minnesota laws and put the government, lawyers and courts in the personal lives of Minnesotans and goes much too far,” he said.

Linnea House of NARAL Pro-Choice Minnesota said there are several efforts she thinks anti-abortion forces like MCCL will try to put forward.

“They have so many things in their arsenal to use — starting with an outright ban on certain types of abortion procedures (saline abortions have been a favorite target in the past) to banning abortion insurance coverage in the still- to-be-developed health care exchanges, to preventing any state funding to go to organizations that provide, refer or support abortions, to overturning the Doe v. Gomez case, which provides funding for abortions for women on Medicaid,” she said.

Some of these initiatives could come in the form of a constitutional amendment, she said, which would bypass Gov.-elect Mark Dayton, who opposes abortion restrictions.

“While all this is frightening, this last one, or the ‘Taxpayer Protection Act’ is incredibly troubling, as it could be offered as a constitutional amendment,” she said.

House said that pro-choice initiatives will likely go nowhere in the upcoming session: “Of course, any forward momentum on getting comprehensive sexuality education will be stalled out over the next year, and we’ll probably see an increase in funding and policies for abstinence-only education. And programs that prevent unintended pregnancies will also probably see decreases in funding due to the budget deficit.”

Ultimately, Stanley hopes that the GOP will focus on jobs in the next biennium. “I’m sure they know – like we do – that this election was not about abortion or women’s health. It was an election that revolved around the economy, jobs and change. In tough economic times Planned Parenthood needs to be supported to serve the women and families that count on us for critical, life saving care.”

House echoed those sentiments. “I’m going to be working hard to hold our elected officials accountable for their recent statements — that this election was about jobs and the economy and not social issues,” she said. “They need to hear from their constituents time and again that we are watching them and expect them to tackle the huge issue at hand, and not act as if they have a mandate from Minnesotans to strip away the rights of women in Minnesota.”

She added, “I will also be working hard to expose any and all anti-choice activities as the extremist agenda it is — and hope to educate a lot of people that we do have a lot to lose in the next two years, and then a lot of work to do to change the tides in 2012.”

Sen. Fischbach told MPR she won’t try to use her new position as a launching pad for her husband’s anti-abortion group. “It’s no big secret that I’m pro-life. And I think that most of our elected senators or our incoming senators are pro-life, and I think that there’s probably a majority in the Senate,” Fischbach said. “So, I don’t see it as a problem or should be a concern for anybody.”

MCCL did not return the Minnesota Independent’s request for comment on the upcoming session.

The divide doesn’t split neatly by party. Even with a DFL-dominated legislature, anti-abortion and pro-choice numbers are close, as many greater Minnesota DFLers side with Republicans on the issue. Perhaps no other issue could cause a DFLer to break ranks and vote against the re-election of House Speaker Margaret Anderson Kelliher, but that’s what happened last week when DFL Rep. Mary Ellen Otremba from Long Prairie was the lone DFL objector because Kelliher is pro-choice and Otremba anti-abortion.

Pro-choice advocates see an opportunity this year to promote family-planning programs. Anti-abortion groups look to stop taxpayer funds for such initiatives and put controversial bills up for a vote.

Minnesota Citizens Concerned for Life launches its legislative agenda each year at the March for Life at the Capitol on the anniversary of the Supreme Court’s 1973 Roe v. Wade decision which legalized abortion. Each year the event brings out big-name politicians. Last year featured Republican U.S. Rep. Michele Bachmann. Democratic Reps. James Oberstar and Collin Peterson often send letters of support that are read to the gathered crowd. It’s rare that Gov. Tim Pawlenty doesn’t make an appearance.

This year, MCCL has an agenda that includes protecting Positive Alternatives, a state-funded program that helps women with unintended pregnancies find alternatives to abortion. The group says that the program has helped reduce the rate of abortion in the state. Supporters fear its funding might be cut in order to close the state’s budget deficit.

With little possibility of moving out of DFL-dominated committees, several other MCCL initiatives serve a different purpose: to embarrass pro-choice legislators in swing districts. A ban on saline abortions tops their agenda. This rarely used abortion technique has fallen out of favor with most physicians and constitutes 0.8 percent of procedures in the United States.

The bill to ban the procedure, which was introduced last session, didn’t make it out of committee. But the MCCL often cites votes against it, either in committee or if it makes it to a floor vote, in its campaign literature.

MCCL representatives declined to talk with the Minnesota Independent about the group’s legislative agenda or their take on what the session has in store for the anti-abortion movement.

On its Web site, the group claimed it had achieved “nearly all pro-life” goals in the 2008 elections, increasing the number of state legislators opposed to abortion and defeating pro-choice legislators.

Tim Stanley, senior director of government and public affairs for Planned Parenthood of Minnesota, North Dakota and South Dakota, explained the strategy behind a bill such as a saline abortion ban:

“They use these to try and make legislators look bad. That’s been their agenda for some time. They offer these bills that have no chance of passing and then use the votes against opponents.”

And, despite a strong year for progressive voters, the strategy worked.

“They ran campaigns against [Rep.] Ken Tschumper [DFL-La Crescent] and [Rep.] Shelley Madore [DFL-Apple Valley] saying they took ’19 votes to kill babies,’” said Stanley. “They make it difficult for people in close legislative districts.”

The MCCL Web site says the group targeted Tschumper and Madore because of their efforts to de-fund Positive Alternatives.

With a looming budget battle, fiscal issues will take priority in the politics of abortion. Planned Parenthood hopes to save the Prevention First Initiative, a state-funded program that provides family planning services as a tool to prevent abortion and unintended pregnancy. It’s a program signed into law in 2007 by Pawlenty, who is a strong supporter of MCCL.

“I give the governor credit for that one,” said Stanley. “I think the governor recognizes that you save money in the long term when you make an investment to prevent unintended pregnancy.” Stanley said programs like Prevention First save $4 in social services costs for every dollar spent.

With a budget battle in which leaders say “everything is on the table,” Stanley hopes to keep the program going. He says that 86 percent of the families and individuals have low incomes and are able to take advantage of the program at little or no cost.

For both sides, the Legislature is close. The Senate has a more pro-choice lean, while the House is closer with several DFLers whose commitment to either side is questionable and whose votes could make the difference. In short, the politics of abortion will remains highly contested in St. Paul.