Michele Joined The Race, and Debated?

I tried to find information on this bill that she supported. It was SF1714 in the 83rd legislative session. This is what I found:
"
S.F. No. 1714, as introduced - 83rd Legislative Session (2003-2004) Posted on Feb 03, 2004

1.1 A bill for an act
1.2 relating to education; authorizing school districts to
1.3 teach students to understand full range of scientific
1.4 views; proposing coding for new law in Minnesota
1.5 Statutes, chapter 120B.
1.6 BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA:
1.7 Section 1. [120B.025] [SCIENCE CURRICULUM.]
1.8 Notwithstanding any rule or law to the contrary, when
1.9 science academic standards are taught that may generate
1.10 controversy, including biological evolution, the curriculum must
1.11 help students to understand the full range of scientific views
1.12 that exist, why such topics may generate controversy, and how
1.13 scientific discoveries can profoundly affect society. A quality
1.14 science education should prepare students to distinguish the
1.15 data and testable theories of science from religious or
1.16 philosophical claims that are made in the name of science."

https://www.revisor.mn.gov/bin/bldbill.php?bill=S1714.0&session=ls83

It reinforces what this website said, although their purpose was to criticize her; that is was an attempt at allowing schools to teach intelligent design. It doesn't seem to be an attempt to force teaching of intelligent design. Do you read it differently? If so can you point out the language that supports your interpretation? Maybe I'm just reading it wrong.
"


Michele Bachmann wants to put “Intelligent Design Theory” on the Minnesota public school science curriculum. 1

“Intelligent Design Theory” is creationism. 2 “Intelligent Design Theory” (ID) is a theory which asserts that life began as the result of an act of creation by a super-human intelligent designer. Most supporters of ID are people who believe that the Bible’s account of creation in Genesis is a literal and historical fact. There is no support for Intelligent Design theory in any respected peer-reviewed scientific journal. 3

Bachmann introduced a bill into the Minnesota Senate that would require public schools to permit teaching of intelligent design creationism in the school science curriculum. 4"
the remainder of the article can be found at: http://www.thebachmannrecord.com/thebachmannrecoc.html

Why?

Because intelligent design absolutely does not belong in a science classroom. Any candidate who is that religious that they need to force their beliefs as fact on the school system in the form of mandates teaching such ridiculousness are scary and shouldn't be in office.

And the only controversy with "intelligent design" are those that don't believe in intelligent design. : )
Did the bill force intelligent design be added to the classroom?
No, it didn't. It allowed those districts that wanted to teach it support to do so with the above quotation you just gave.

I really don't have a big bias either way to teaching intelligent design. Evolution is a theory and intelligent design is a theory. It would make for an interesting discussion/debate in the classroom, which could really spark learning. So from that perspective, I don't understand the concern over adding it to the curriculum, especially if it's not forced. Let the teacher add it how they like.
One of my kids had a teacher that discussed it in their class. He gave all the reason's why it was false. The kids really enjoyed their discussions and for my very not so good at science student, it helped engage her in the class as a whole.
Isn't that what science is about; exploration?