Minnesota lawmakers block funding for pregnancy support centers


Listen To Story Above

Minnesota state representatives have dealt a significant blow to pro-life initiatives by voting down crucial bills aimed at protecting unborn children and maintaining support for pregnancy alternatives.

Jessica Chastek, who serves on the board of Options for Women East, a licensed pro-life medical facility in St. Paul, shared insights with Blaze News about the impact of these legislative defeats. The facility provides comprehensive healthcare services for families from pregnancy through the first three years after birth.

The Minnesota House recently rejected two significant abortion-related measures. First was the “Born Alive” bill, which would have granted full human rights to infants surviving birth, including those who survive abortion procedures. This decision follows a 2022 ruling by District Judge Thomas Gilligan that eliminated six abortion restrictions, including waiting periods and parental notification requirements.

“These abortion laws violate the right to privacy because they infringe upon the fundamental right under the Minnesota Constitution to access abortion care and do not withstand strict scrutiny,” Gilligan stated in his 2022 ruling.

The second defeated measure, the Supporting Women Act, would have reinstated vital state funding for pregnancy centers – funding that had been in place since 2005 but was withdrawn following the 2022 Dobbs decision.

“We had a $150,000 grant thrown away overnight,” Chastek revealed.

This financial hit, representing approximately one-third of Options’ budget, has forced significant operational cutbacks, particularly in staffing.

“The paid positions have to go away. So you have fewer nurses, you have fewer sonographers, and so you can offer fewer programs, which means fewer babies and moms being supported,” Chastek explained.

The political landscape has shifted dramatically since the original Positive Alternatives Grant Program’s inception. Two decades ago, the program received bipartisan support, including from Democratic Representatives Melissa Hortman and Tina Liebling, who now oppose similar initiatives.

Recent polling suggests Americans favor some abortion limitations, with only 19% nationally supporting unrestricted access. In Minnesota, while 26% support unrestricted access, 24% believe abortion should be largely restricted.

“The Democratic Party is saying we will not support any institutional organization that does not counsel for abortion,” Chastek stated. “That is the explicit outcome. That is their intention. They won’t fund us because we will not counsel for abortion.”

During legislative debates, Democratic representatives raised various concerns. Representative Carlie Kotyza-Witthuhn questioned the oversight of these facilities, while Representative Leigh Finke suggested these centers might mislead certain populations.

Rep. Natalie Zeleznikar, the bill’s sponsor, defended the centers, noting zero fraud allegations during their 17 years of previous funding.

Chastek criticized Governor Tim Walz’s stance on abortion access, suggesting his administration is actively promoting Minnesota as an abortion destination while reducing support for pregnancy alternatives.

Despite these challenges, pregnancy resource centers like Options for Women East continue their work through private funding. “We need to open our checkbooks, and we need to support these clinics,” Chastek emphasized.

“When we let them kill their kids, we kill their hope. And we can’t do that,” she concluded. “We have to be able to encourage these women and support them and not just walk away from them.”

 

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR