Chelsea Clinton has generated media attention with her 14-day, 10-city “Rise Up for Roe Tour,” sponsored by pro-abortion rights groups Planned Parenthood Action Fund, Demand Justice and NARAL Pro-Choice America.
During her first stop in New York City, Ms. Clinton claimed that Roe v. Wade has been good for America’s economy because it enabled women to enter the workforce and contribute $3.5 trillion to the economy. And that alone, she asserts, should motivate citizens to cherish and support abortion.
There is no evidence to suggest that the women who entered the workforce between 1970 and 2009 would not have done so without access to abortion. Based upon economic and social trends it is much more likely that many, if not most of them, would have been employed outside of the home regardless of having an abortion or giving birth.
Considerable evidence conflicts with her basic premise that abortion on demand, the result of Roe and its companion case Doe, benefits America, even through the lens of economics.
Let’s consider the economic impact of those missing 60 million babies who were aborted, namely tens of millions more people who would have entered the workforce and contributed enough to the U.S. economy likely dwarfing Ms. Clinton’s figure. Their parent/parents or doting grandparents would have stimulated the economy with the purchase of diapers, cribs, car seats, baby food and toys. There would have been more cars and homes purchased to accommodate growing families. Purchasing childhood bicycles, clothing, food and entertainment (imagine it, Disney!) would have noticeably increased. Envision the additional number of sitters and daycare workers who would have been employed.
Recommended
Companies struggling to find employees to hire would have an easier time with tens of millions more people in the workforce.
It should not be lost on teachers’ unions, traditionally supportive of abortion, that the demand for their services would have been measurably higher had 60 million babies been allowed to live. Vocational centers, colleges and universities would enjoy higher enrollments. The pizzerias, bars and eateries surrounding these campuses would be doing more business.
This merely scratches the surface of economic benefits that have been lost.
Looking at the bigger picture, abortion has a generational impact. Many of the babies aborted in the 1970s would have grown up and given birth, allowing the next generation to enter the workforce and repeat the cycle of stimulating the economy.
Even if we approach abortion only from a calculated, money-motivated point of view; if we ignore the social impact of denying tens of millions of Americans their basic right to be born; if we disregard abortion’s violence and its psychological impact on those involved, we would nevertheless readily benefit from its absence.
A nation’s best renewable resource is its children. They bring unique insights and wisdom, adding to the diversity of the fabric of life. They participate in and contribute to the economy, making our nation richer – both in a sense of economics and humanity.
Chelsea Clinton is wrong on all fronts.
Bradley Mattes, MBS, is the president of Life Issues Institute, a pro-life organization dedicated to educating the pro-life grassroots on all life issues. Life Issues Institute is the pro-life grassroots partner of the Susan B. Anthony List Education Fund.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member