" Let ’s give votes to all children in this country , but let ’s give control over those vote to the parents of the tiddler . "
On Monday, former president Donald Trumpannouncedhis vice presidential running mate: Ohio Senator J.D. Vance.
There areendless reasonswhy I find this alarming, from Vance’s anti-LGBTQ legislation to his disparaging remarks about DEI initiatives. But I want to focus on an old speech that’s been recirculating since the news broke.
In 2021, Vancespokeat the Intercollegiate Studies Institute’s conference on the Future of American Political Economy, where he blamed “the childless left” for the nation’s woes. As a woman who’sintentionally childfree, I am livid over this rhetoric. According to him, we have “no physical commitment to the future of this country.”
This is an American take if I’ve ever seen one. Vance’s hyper-focus on the individual and the nuclear family is nothing new in this country. But in many cultures, including my own, the emphasis lies on the extended family and wider community. While I don’t have children, my cousins do, and I certainly have a vested interest in my nieces' and nephews' futures. Beyond that, I want to see my communities flourish — not just while I’m part of them, but after I’m gone because I am a human being with empathy and compassion for others in this world.
Vance specifically call out several Democrats for not having " a personal and verbatim stake in [ our state ] via their own offspring " : Alexandria Ocasio - Cortez , Cory Booker , Pete Buttigieg , and Kamala Harris ( disregarding that the Vice President is the stepmother of her husband ’s two child ) . Since this speech , Buttigieg and his married man haveadoptedtwo tyke .
Vance bemoaned the current state of “family formation” and “birth rates” in the US. But in true Republican fashion, he didn’t bother exploringwhymany Americans are having fewer children. A quick perusal of social media will show countless people torn over having kids due to a myriad of reasons: skyrocketing cost-of-living and childcare costs, climate change, healthcare prices, the fear of school shootings, the increasing maternal mortality rate, etc. The list goes on.
Did Vance propose sound solutions to the “civilization crisis” like addressing climate change? Of course not. (Hedoesn’t believethat people contribute to climate change.) Other than praising Hungary’s pro-natal policies, the only suggestion he offered was this preposterous idea: “Let’s give votes to all children in this country, but let’s give control over those votes to the parents of the children.”
He continued, “Doesn’t this mean that nonparents don’t have as much of a voice as parents? Doesn’t this mean that parents get a bigger say in how democracy functions?” He answered his own questions with a “yes” after admitting “the Atlantic and the Washington Post and all the usual suspects” would criticize him.
Well, I’ll gladly join the chorus of criticism. This is such a heinous notion that it’s hard to believe a politician would even think this to himself, let alone say it out loud. I was born in the United States. I work and pay taxes here — hell, I even interned for a senator in college (without pay, I might add). My vote should hold the same weight as any other person’s. Though this country certainly wasn’t built on equality, the US claims to stand for it now, and this flies in the face of that. It’s a betrayal of American values.
I shouldn’t even need to say this, but having a child doesn’t magically transform someone into an exemplary citizen. While parents have an important and often thankless job, the decision to have kids should not automatically give them a greater voice in our democracy. And aside from all the childfree folks, what about families struggling to conceive? Parents who’ve lost children? Queer couples who want kids but can’t yet afford adoption or fertility treatments? The simple act of voting would always remind them of their hardship — and how the government punishes them for it.
But that’s par for the course for Vance, who supports a nationalabortion ban. According to thePew Research Center, 61% of women who had abortions in 2021 had given birth before. Despite the evil picture that Republicans often paint about people who have abortions, many are simply parents who want to focus on the children they already have. Why should Vance’s irrelevant opinion supersede these parents' informed decisions about their families and health?
After Vance received blowback for his ludicrous suggestion, he appeared onTucker Carlson Tonight, where he double downed. “We are effectively run in this country…by a bunch of childless cat ladies who are miserable at their own lives and the choices that they’ve made, and so they want to make the rest of the country miserable, too. And it’s just a basic fact.”
Let’s all laugh together at that one. I’m a dog mom, not a cat lady, but I can wholeheartedly say that waking up at noon on the weekends, taking my pup for adventures whenever I want, and traveling with my boyfriend as we please make for a happy life. Many childfree women report the same. According to Paul Dolan, the professor of behavioral science at the London School of Economics and Political Science who wroteHappy Ever After,evidencefrom the American Time Use Survey suggests that unmarried and childfree women are the happiest and healthiest subgroup of the population.
It’s worth noting that another 2021speechhas resurfaced where Vance said, “One of the great tricks that I think the sexual revolution pulled on the American populace” was convincing people in “unhappy” or “even violent” marriages that getting divorced would “make people happier in the long term.” He also criticized people who “shift spouses like they change their underwear” — ironic, considering Trump is on his third marriage.
Though Vance claims to be pro-family, it’s clear to me that he’s anti-woman. I will happily take my childfree self to the voting booth in November and do my part in ensuring Trump and Vance lose. Will you?
