There are many ways you could describe this administration. But between JD Vance saying he wants “more babies” in the U.S., Donald Trump saying he is “the fertilization president,” and Elon Musk’s goal to have a “legion of kids” with any woman who looks his way, “pronatalist freaks” is high on the list.
You can't report on this garbage without informing readers of the literal identical policy under Hitler. www.nytimes.com/2025/04/21/u…
— Philip N Cohen (@philipncohen.com) 2025-04-21T14:58:35.570Z
Collins, who has four children and envisions a future with “mass production of genetically selected humans” via IVF, also said she believed the administration is “inherently pronatalist” due to Trump calling for a baby boom and the presence of children at events. “Look at the number of kids that major leaders in the administration have,” Collins said, adding: “You didn’t hear about kids in the same way under Biden.” Actually, I do recall hearing a lot about kids when the Biden-supported child tax credit passed in 2021, giving eligible parents $300 a month for each child. And then again, when Republicans, and one very cruel Democrat, let it expire just six months later.
The Heritage Foundation, which wrote the Project 2025 playbook, told the NYT that its “newest and boldest” idea is a tax-based inducement to have more kids: They said they’ll soon release a report calling for tax credits for married couples, in which the couple will get money for each additional child. But again, it would only be for married couples, not, say, women who have kids using sperm donors.
It’s comical to consider any of this bold when there are much bolder ideas to make having children seem like a realistic future for people, namely proposals from the Black-women led reproductive justice movement that calls for living wages, universal healthcare, and safe communities free from pollution and gun violence, including at the hands of police.
The NYT story does not address race at all, or the racist and even eugenic views espoused by top leaders in the administration. (Though it does claim that “the coalition of people who want to see more babies born is broad and diverse” because people have differing views on the morality of IVF. Diversity!)
Yes, Trump said in 2023 that he wants a “baby boom.” But among who? This is the same person who claimed in October that, due to immigration, “we got a lot of bad genes in our country right now.” In late 2023, Trump said immigrants were “poisoning the blood of our country.” Vice President JD Vance told the March for Life that he wants “more babies in the United States of America” parented by “beautiful young men and women” who are “eager to raise them.” Who does that apply to? Shadow President Elon Musk, the billionaire obsessed with birth rates, has spouted the white nationalist Great Replacement Theory and has conceived multiple children via IVF, with a reported preference for boys. Musk also falsely believes that people who qualify for government benefits are perpetrating widespread fraud and abuse.
Overall, it’s laughable that this administration would increase spending on anything other than tax cuts for billionaires like Musk. But one also has to question if any potential “baby bonuses” or tax credits would be distributed equally. After all, as of December 2023, seven states still have so-called “family caps” on Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) that deny additional benefits to families who have more children while they’re eligible for TANF. (States have historically sought to punish low-income people who have children by pursuing benefit caps, forced birth control, and even sterilization, all while perpetuating racist stereotypes about alleged “welfare queens.”) This is a party and an administration that is proposing work requirements for Medicaid.
It’s more likely that any pronatalist policy would be limited to people who don’t qualify for government benefits, which is to say, encouraging birth among those who are more likely to be white and at least middle-class. History is rhyming once again.
Like what you just read? You’ve got great taste. Subscribe to Jezebel, and for $5 a month or $50 a year, you’ll get access to a bunch of subscriber benefits, including getting to read the next article (and all the ones after that) ad-free. Plus, you’ll be supporting independent journalism—which, can you even imagine not supporting independent journalism in times like these? Yikes.
