Some Republican legislators recently said they'll sponsor legislation banning abortions in Utah -- and they plan to take the fight all the way to the Supreme Court if they have to.

Sandstrom says it's appropriate for family-friendly Utah to take the lead on this issue, and that success here might start a domino effect on abortion laws in some other states.

Aside from the question of abortion itself, the lawmakers have drawn flak for their plans. Critics say it's a political stunt that will cost the state millions and in the end will accomplish nothing.

They point to 1991, when the state passed a law banning abortion. It was contested in court, and judges blocked the law from taking effect. Back then, supporters claimed that private donors would pay for the action, but the state wound up footing $1 million in legal fees.

The current measure's backers insist that various groups and foundations have already made commitments to funding the battle. A skeptic, however, might wonder how firm those commitments are. Cold, hard cash beats any vows of support, no matter how fervent. The lawmakers could address this by releasing more information about the groups said to be involved.

In all this, there is one charge that ought to be rebutted. The legislators behind the promised abortion bill are being lambasted for unveiling it a month before an election. What better time to introduce a hot-button issue? Right now people are focused on political issues more than at any other time. And so the charge is that they're politically motivated.

But when should legislators announce such a drive? After the election? Then they'd be accused of deceiving their constituents by not publicizing their beliefs when voters were mulling things over. Or should these lawmakers unveil the plans in some politically dead season -- say July of a non-election year? Then they'd be accused of trying to bury it.

No, this is the best time.

Politicians are often raked over the coals for ducking touchy issues. These legislators should be applauded for bringing this up now, even if it is very likely a doomed cause. The rejoinder to doom might be that many important American ideas have been seen as lost causes. Their advocates, however, slogged on, regardless of defeats. Eventually they triumphed. Why shouldn't people try?

While chances of success with a state abortion ban look dim, one might observe that today's conservative majority in the Supreme Court may open a window. Many efforts over 35 years to overturn or limit the Supreme Court's 1973 Roe v. Wade decision have failed, but that doesn't mean that they always must fail. Utah abortion foes feel it might be better to try now than after a President Obama begins naming justices.

On the other hand, this effort -- if likely doomed -- may not even be good from a conservative point of view. Political movements have finite amounts of energy and resources. A quixotic drive to change the abortion laws would cost money, time and energy. So the basic question ought to be asked: Is there a sufficient chance of success to warrant the effort?

In general, Utahns seem wary of bold action -- note the unfortunate defeat of school vouchers last year. One factor seems to be that Utah conservatism can give rise to a contradictory dynamic when they're asked to do something innovative. In this case, they don't like abortion but neither do they like sweeping change or the wasting of money.

Practical-minded Utahns who oppose abortion may nonetheless want their legislators to try less radical steps that have a better chance of success.

That attitude may only be stoked by the current economic worries. The Utah Legislature has pressing financial questions to deal with. It may be guessed that Utahns will want their representatives and senators to stick to their knitting for at least the next year.

This plan for Utah to challenge the national abortion law faces a very tough uphill climb. That's not to say abortion foes must concede defeat; it's simply to face the reality that success may not be in the cards.

Then again, perhaps it's worth just making a point.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------