Debate Among Senators: Examining the Relationship Between Abortion and the Economy

In a recent hearing titled “No Rights to Speak of: The Economic Harms of Restricting Reproductive Freedom,” the U.S. Senate Committee on the Budget delved into the relationship between abortion and the economy. The debate among senators shed light on the complex and controversial issues surrounding reproductive rights.

Committee chairman Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) argued that reproductive rights are intricately tied to economic opportunity. He highlighted the economic harm that could result from dismantling Roe v. Wade, the landmark Supreme Court decision that returned abortion access policy back to state control. According to Whitehouse, the Dobbs decision triggered an immediate crisis for millions of women as state bans on abortion snapped back into place and new restrictions on reproductive freedom were implemented. He emphasized that reproductive freedom and choice, including access to abortions and contraception, increase the probability of women attending college and boost local economies.

Ranking member Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), on the other hand, countered that abortion is a moral and legal issue that cannot be solely examined through an economic lens. Grassley stressed that life is priceless and that the issue of abortion is dehumanizing when reduced to dollars and cents. He advocated for focusing on reforms that increase coordination between federal programs and simplify access to assistance for women, children, and families in need.

The hearing featured five witnesses with opposing viewpoints, including mom and abortion activist Allie Phillips, economics professor Caitlin Myers, Dr. Leilah Zahedi-Spung who specializes in Maternal Fetal Medicine and performs abortions, Leslie Ford from the Center on Opportunity and Social Mobility at the American Enterprise Institute, and Tamra Call, executive director at Obria Medical Clinic in Iowa.

One of the most compelling testimonies came from Allie Phillips, who tearfully shared her personal experience in Tennessee when she and her husband learned at 19 weeks into her pregnancy that their baby girl had severe congenital issues. Phillips was unable to get an abortion in Tennessee and had to travel to New York City, which incurred unexpected medical and travel costs. Her story highlighted the financial challenges faced by women seeking abortions and the importance of reproductive freedom.

Economics professor Caitlin Myers presented evidence on the economic impact of abortion. She emphasized that the legalization of abortion reduced teen motherhood and marriages, allowing women to complete their education and increase their earnings. Myers argued that abortion improved the lives of children, reducing poverty rates and instances of abuse or neglect. She acknowledged the substantial obstacles faced by individuals seeking abortions in states with restrictive laws, highlighting the privilege of being able to travel long distances for healthcare.

Throughout the hearing, Democratic speakers repeatedly criticized Republican politicians for their stance on abortion, using phrases like “anti-abortion extremism.” They argued that restricting reproductive rights not only takes away a woman’s control over her own body but also affects her ability to plan her family, finances, and future. They claimed that forcing women to stay pregnant often leads to financial hardship and lack of support.

Sen. Whitehouse warned of a potential national abortion ban if a Republican-led Congress and a second Trump administration were to come into power, although former President Donald Trump has not explicitly expressed such intentions. He called on Congress to codify abortion and contraception access into law, emphasizing the economic gains that have resulted from women’s freedom to make their own decisions.

The hearing provided a platform for different perspectives on the relationship between abortion and the economy. It highlighted the emotional and financial challenges faced by women seeking abortions, as well as the potential economic benefits of reproductive freedom. The debate among senators underscored the deeply divisive nature of this issue and the need for continued dialogue and examination of its complexities.