Minnesota is now viewed by many as a stronghold of radical left-wing liberal “progressivism.” Yet Minnesota once had one of the strongest pro-life organizations in the state, and several members of Congress—Republican and Democrat (Jim Oberstar, the state’s longest-serving congressman, was a staunch pro-life activist)—supported the Human Life Amendment.

Minnesota Citizens Concerned for Life (MCCL) is one of the strong pro-life organizations in Minnesota that has been fighting this fight for a long time.

Cathy Blaeser, co-director of MCCL, spoke with Catholic World Report recently about Tim Walz, whom pro-life activists in Minnesota know and who is causing them serious concern.

CWR: Tim Walz has been governor of Minnesota since 2019. During his first term, he faced a pro-life Republican legislature. What was that term like?

Ms Blaeser: During Governor Walz’s first term, Republican control of one chamber of the legislature prevented the passage of the worst pro-life laws.

Still, Walz found ways to promote abortion and oppose pro-life alternatives. He tried to partially defund the Positive Alternatives program, which provides pregnant women with alternatives to abortion. (He later succeeded in repealing the entire law during his second term.)

During the pandemic, he temporarily suspended all medical procedures but made an exception for abortion. His administration also provided nearly $100,000 in COVID funds to a group that specializes in “abortion doulas” (people who assist women with their abortions).

CWR: In 2022, Democrats took control of the Minnesota legislature, sparking a major pro-abortion campaign. What were the “highlights” of this wave of legislation?

Ms Blaeser: In January 2023, Walz signed the PRO Act (“Protect Reproductive Options”), which enshrined in Minnesota law a “fundamental right” to abortion with no restrictions at any stage of pregnancy.

Walz also signed a sweeping bill that repealed numerous common-sense and longstanding abortion policies. Among other things, it repealed Minnesota’s Positive Alternatives Act to support pregnant women, the Women’s Right to Informed Consent Act, and the requirement that only doctors perform abortions. It also repealed protections for newborns, which I’ll discuss separately. And it repealed parts of Minnesota’s longstanding abortion reporting law.

Now the public won’t know numbers on complications women suffer, how many babies survive abortion, and more. The new law also pushes back the reporting deadline, so Minnesotans won’t know the latest abortion numbers — which show the impact of recent law changes — until later in the year (after the 2024 election).

CWR: Late-term abortions often result in a child being born alive. Minnesota used to have a Born Child Protection Act that stipulated that the life of such a baby must be protected because it is now a US citizen under the 14th Amendment to the Constitution. Walz has refuted this. How?

Ms Blaeser: Previously, Minnesota state law guaranteed medically appropriate life-saving treatment to infants who survived abortion.

However, in 2023, the Legislature and Governor Walz removed the requirement that “reasonable measures consistent with good medical practice” be taken “to preserve the life and health of the infant born alive.” They replaced the requirement of life-saving measures with a requirement to provide only “nursing” (which the bill’s author referred to as “comfort” care throughout committee discussions and floor debates).

Furthermore, the new law no longer applies specifically to babies who survive an abortion, but to all babies born alive. So under the new language, any viable infant could be denied life-saving treatment and could die. They don’t want to say it out loud, but by manipulating the meaning and standard of “treatment,” that’s exactly what they’re doing, playing a shell game.

CWR: The Reproductive Freedom Defense Act immunizes abortion doctors in Minnesota who ply their trade to women from other states. What happens if an abortion doctor botches the procedure? Can they be held liable in a court in another state? What happens if an abortion doctor faces a minor woman whose state of residence prohibits abortions without parental consent or notification? How would such a case be handled in Minnesota? Can a minor unilaterally consent to an abortion?

Ms Blaeser: The new law prohibits Minnesota from extraditing abortion laws or assisting in enforcing those laws. So an underage girl can come to Minnesota to have an abortion. Minnesota would not comply with an extradition request from another state to that state’s court. However, the new law would not limit a civil suit from another state if it would establish a cause of action in Minnesota.

CWR: Before becoming governor, Walz represented Minnesota’s 1st congressional district in Congress. During his tenure in Congress, he had a 100% approval rating for Planned Parenthood and a 0% approval rating for National Right to Life. Can you speak to his pro-abortion stance during his congressional career?

Ms Blaeser: When Walz was in Congress, he repeatedly voted for taxpayer funding for abortion. He repeatedly voted against protecting unborn children in later stages of pregnancy, when they can feel pain. He co-sponsored legislation that would repeal nearly all state and federal restrictions on abortion.

And he voted against the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act, which is designed to ensure that newborns who survive abortion are treated with the same care as other babies of the same age (so they are not neglected, abandoned, or killed).

CWR: What is Walz’s stance on euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide?

Ms Blaeser: Walz has said he is “open-minded” to the idea of ​​legalizing assisted suicide, saying it would harm elderly, disabled and medically vulnerable patients in our state.

But his other policies have also had an impact on people at the end of life. During the pandemic, Walz allowed COVID-infected patients to be transferred back to long-term care facilities, even those with known infection control problems, despite the risks to the most vulnerable patients. Under Walz, funding for nursing homes was severely inadequate, despite a huge budget surplus and tax increases.

Walz has also tried to move Minnesota toward a government-run health care system, which would inevitably lead to rationing and pressure to legalize assisted suicide.

And in 2023, he supported the creation of a health care affordability panel with the power to set spending caps to encourage cuts in care for the most vulnerable patients (the Mayo Clinic helped stop the proposal by threatening to leave the state).