Abortion bans make people move
Upwardly mobile libs can leave, and they are.
It’s been a snowy week! It’s a little unnerving to see how much wildlife activity goes on in my yard, which I’d never know about but for all the footprints in the snow.
1. Flight of the young libs
One of the secondary arguments against abortion bans is they’ll cause people to leave states that enact them — health care professionals, in particular, but also other people who want to live in states that reflect their values.
A new paper from Georgia Institute of Technology researchers, entitled, “Are People Fleeing States with Abortion Bans?” presents empirical evidence in support of that claim — and also a rare affirmative answer to a question mark headline.
The authors analyzed change-of-address data from the U.S. Postal Service and determined the 13 states that banned abortion immediately after the Supreme Court’s June 2022 Dobbs decision are losing residents at a combined pace of 144,000 per year because of those policies.
They find:
State-level abortion bans following the Dobbs decision increased net migration outflows, highlighting that reproductive healthcare access has a measurable effect on residential decisions. The effects are particularly large and growing over time for single-person households, suggesting an outsized influence of reproductive rights on younger, more mobile populations.
This tracks with survey results in which most young professionals say they do not want to live in states with abortion bans. At least some are apparently acting on their preferences.
Indiana is not included in the paper’s main data set because the state’s abortion ban was held up in court before taking effect in August 2023. Even if Indiana were included, 144,000 people per year spread across 13 states is a fairly small number.
But it seems directionally true that Indiana has made itself less appealing to well-educated young workers and that at least some are choosing to leave here or not move here at all because of the state’s abortion ban, among other policies. I’ve heard anecdotal concerns from women who do not want to become pregnant while living here, and I can understand why based on how abortion bans hamstring doctors’ choices in treating medical complications during pregnancy.
To many of the Republican lawmakers who voted to ban abortion in Indiana, I’m sure pushing away the young libs is a feature and not a bug. But even people who oppose abortion on moral grounds should be able see how that mindset is going to leave Indiana less educated, with fewer skilled workers and a weaker economy.
On top of all that, abortions are increasing nationally, so Indiana and other states are hurting themselves by banning the procedure without achieving their overarching policy objectives.
2. Maybe these numbered sections are dumb
I got some feedback this week that my newsletter numbering is onerous and I should just focus on the main item up top. That’s possibly good advice. I’m ignoring it, for now.
I’ve adopted the numbered sections because they’re similar to the format I used (and liked) at Axios, and I’ve also enjoyed seeing it elsewhere, including in Jonathan V. Last’s newsletter for the Bulwark. Also, I’m only sending this newsletter once a week, so I feel like I need to include more than one thing. Maybe I don’t!
I’m still not really sure what I want this newsletter to be, so I’ve started out in a comfort zone in hopes of making it just good enough while I figure things out. I’m not married to anything I’m doing here — or even to continuing to do it at all if the newsletter turns out not to offer value.
I am enjoying the process, though, and I feel like I’m learning new things. For example, I’ve gravitated toward a more bloggy-style voice here, which has been different and fun for me.
I might drop the numbers and change the format. I’m going to keep thinking about it. I love getting feedback on what’s working, or isn’t, and I promise to seriously consider it even if I don’t act on it right away (or ever)!
3. What I wrote
I published one column this week for IndyStar:
4. What I read
Back to work, back to my book slump. But I’m still reading other stuff. Such as:
Derek Thompson on our self-imposed solitude
The individual preference for solitude, scaled up across society and exercised repeatedly over time, is rewiring America’s civic and psychic identity. And the consequences are far-reaching—for our happiness, our communities, our politics, and even our understanding of reality.
Matthew Yglesias on the differences between men and women
The idea of separating men and women in certain spheres of life is not just an arbitrary tradition, it reflects real differences and a considered judgment that the best way to secure equal rights and equal opportunities for women is, in some cases, through separation. The sports issue is probably the most broadly obvious of these, not least because feminists invested a lot of time and energy over the years specifically into building up women’s sports programs.
5. Flight of the manufacturing jobs
If Indiana can’t keep skilled workers, it’s also going to have a problem keeping jobs for unskilled workers. This snapshot of our manufacturing sector isn’t pretty.
Thanks for reading! Please share this with anyone else who might want to subscribe. Have a great weekend!
I like the numbered sections.
For what it's worth, I like the numbered sections.