In the past several weeks, researchers have published papers that claim to show dire economic consequences when states restrict abortion. Abortion supporters are hoping that pro-lifers can be swayed by focusing on economics and the financial consequences of prohibiting abortion.

Pro-life states reportedly saw a slight increase in rental vacancies and a corresponding decrease in monthly rents, according to a recent working paper from the National Bureau of Economic Research.

The researchers “found that between July 2022 — the first month after the fall of Roe v. Wade — and June 2025, housing markets with abortion bans experienced a 2.2 percent decline in rental prices, compared to similarly trending markets in states without bans,” as reported by the 19th News. “Rental vacancies went up by an average of 1.1 percent in housing markets with abortion bans compared to similar markets in states without bans.”

The authors argue this shows people are moving due to laws against abortion. The underlying message is states should not restrict abortion because they will lose citizens.

The results show abortion prohibitions “move the needle significantly when it comes to the real estate market,” economist Jason Lindo told the 19th News. The news outlet does not mention Lindo and co-author Daniel Dench wrote the paper after receiving financial assistance from the pro-abortion Center for Reproductive Rights. It is noted in the National Bureau of Economic Research’s full publication, however.

Lindo suggested different reasons might play a role in why people move, but argued abortion bans “signal” to women that state leaders do not value them.

“It could be about the social message or about the broader policy climate or concerns regarding bodily autonomy or concerns around how issues concerning women are treated in the state,” Lindo said. “Abortion bans affect abortion access, but also it’s possible the effects we find could be a result of what the abortion bans signal more broadly.”

This is not the only recent paper to use an economic argument to attempt to sway pro-lifers. Another paper from a University of Kentucky graduate student suggests welfare usage and birth rates increased in pro-life states.

“The increase in monthly WIC participation translates to a total additional $6.9 million in food costs for the states that implemented a total abortion ban by the beginning of 2023,” Lilly Springer wrote. She credited Dench, the co-author of the rental market paper, for helping her on this study. Springer did not disclose Dench’s connection to a pro-abortion organization.

Springer said the increase in welfare use means some people may not be able to receive food assistance because of a wait list driven by increased births.

The researcher wants her study to “help public officials and policymakers address and mitigate potential spillover effects from policies such as abortion bans that were previously assumed to be unrelated.”

While put in the academic language of an economist, this paper and the rental market study obscure the real, underlying issue about abortion: the humanity of preborn babies and their worthiness for protection. Abortion supporters want to turn a heartbeat and a face on an ultrasound into a faceless cost on a state budget.

But pro-life activists know all human beings have inherent value and dignity by virtue of being conceived and this cannot be taken away by punching numbers into a calculator. Society has seen via slavery what happens when human beings are turned into products with their own calculated costs and values.

We should not be fooled into reducing humans into mere objects again, no matter how smart the so-called experts seem.