U.S. Politics: Who’s the Pro-Family Party Now?

The Persistent is available as a newsletter. Sign up here to get it delivered to your inbox.

At last week’s presidential debate between Kamala Harris and Donald Trump only one candidate used the words “families” and “freedom.” 

Kamala Harris.

Over the course of the 90-minute event, the Democratic nominee invoked the word “freedom” three times in reference to reproductive autonomy. 

And she invoked the word “families” (or “family”) nine times, most often in the context of a proposed $6,000 tax credit for families with newborns; and once to explain the multiple barriers—including threats to IVF access and reproductive health restrictions—faced by people trying to grow their family. 

Donald Trump? He neither uttered the word “freedom” nor described what he would do for “families.”

It’s a razor-sharp example of the Harris campaign’s intentional and careful reclaiming and repurposing of words that for years seemed to belong to Republican politicians.

So-Called 'Family Values'

It was Ronald Reagan who, in the 1980s, claimed “freedom” and “family values” for the Republican party, though his administration offered neither. 

Reagan vilified unmarried Black mothers as “welfare queens” to justify cuts to safety net spending and impose onerous conditions on receipt of public assistance, making it much harder for families with low incomes to survive. 

Then there was the abortion issue.

Even before the Reagan era, conservative strategists were laying the groundwork to overturn Roe v. Wade—the landmark 1973 Supreme Court decision which guaranteed Americans the constitutional right to an abortion—without anything close to equal attention to policies that would support so-called “family values,” such as living wage, child care, or paid leave policies. 

That was more or less the status quo for Republicans until 2022 when the Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization overturned Roe v. Wade: For a brief moment, it seemed like Republicans might realize the importance of policies like paid leave even as freedoms were stripped away. 

Alas, a more family-friendly approach didn’t materialize, either in states that restrict or ban abortion or at the national level. 

Indeed, 25 Republican-led states now ban or severely restrict abortion access, and none have adopted a paid family and medical leave program for new parents in the private sector. The majority have not invested in child care and still maintain a low minimum wage, which makes it close to impossible for breadwinners with children to make ends meet. And one state is still refusing federal funds for maternal and infant health.

Even though a handful of Republicans joined Democrats in exploring paid leave options, none have committed to supporting a national version of the comprehensive universal paid family and medical leave programs that have improved the health and economic outcomes of families in states that have implemented them.  

And in August 2024, nearly all Republican senators voted against an expanded child tax credit—a proven tool in reducing child poverty and increasing families’ economic security.

Unpacking the Trump-Vance Ticket

Meanwhile, although Trump’s term in office included some advances on paid parental leave for federal government workers, the Trump ticket has said nothing about paid family and medical leave this time around. 

Earlier this month, when Trump was asked how he’d tackle child care costs, he responded with a flip remark that “child care is child care, it’s something you have to have in this country.” But he offered no plan for it. Instead, he pivoted to a discussion of tariffs on foreign goods.  

Trump has also been non-committal and confusing about his stance on national abortion restrictions, but said he plans to vote personally to maintain Florida’s restrictive six-week abortion ban, which will be put before the state’s voters in November. 

As for Vance, his position is abundantly clear: He has both vilified women without children as selfish and failed to offer structural child care solutions to parents, suggesting that grandparents, aunts and uncles can help to fill gaps. Vance claims to support an increased child tax credit, but missed the Senate vote on expanding the Child Tax Credit in August.

Unpacking the Harris-Walz Ticket

For her part, Harris on the campaign trail has framed her economic policies as pro-family and pro-care. From the get-go, she has spoken about the importance of expanding access to paid family and medical leave and child care. Her campaign has proposed a $6000 new child tax credit and a reinstatement of the Biden-Harris expanded child tax credit, a temporary pandemic-era policy that substantially reduced child poverty, but lapsed at the end of 2021 without congressional agreement to renew it. 

Her agenda builds on efforts during the Biden-Harris administration to promote maternal health equity and safeguard reproductive rights, executive actions to promote care for children and older adults, and budget commitments to paid leave and care policies. 

Harris has said she selected Tim Walz as her running mate, in part, because of his legislative record, which included policies aimed at making Minnesota the best state to raise a family.

After the fall of Roe, Minnesota was the first state to pass a law enshrining the right to an abortion. Walz, as governor, signed one of the country’s most comprehensive paid family and medical leave laws allowing people to take leave after birth or adoption, or when providing care to a loved one or when dealing with a personal health crisis. His state passed paid sick time, extended the child income tax credit to help offset the costs of day care and diapers, and expanded free school lunches for all students, so parents at all income levels could skip paying for, or packing, lunch. And the state issued $6 million in state grants to support childcare centers. 

Policies (Or Lack Thereof) Playing Out in Real Time

The consequences of America’s broad failure to invest in policies to support families is showing up in Americans’ decisions to have—or not have—children. 

For example, 2023 saw the lowest fertility rate in U.S. history. And in a recent survey of adults under 50 without children, more than one-third said their decision not to become a parent was related to their inability to afford a child.

All of this is exacerbated by the fact that it’s dangerous to become a mother in the U.S. compared with every other developed country. A lack ​​of prenatal health providers in some states and poor time-off policies surely add to the rising share of pregnant people going without prenatal care. And that’s linked to health issues—especially for Black women, low-income women, immigrant women, and women in rural areas. 

A majority of Americans support policies like paid family and medical leave, child care investments, and reproductive freedom that comprise a more pro-family vision. In a recent survey of 4,003 registered voters, 82% of respondents agreed that policymakers should do more to support families’ care needs. And separate surveys of adults in the U.S. from the Pew Research Center, found that super-majorities agree a legal right to abortion should be restored. 

As for America’s “childless cat ladies”—surprise!—they’re also supportive of these kinds of policies. 

Perhaps the presidential election will establish once and for all that true pro-family policy is about actually supporting families. That means ensuring support for people raising children, allowing people to care for loved ones without risking a job, and giving individuals the ability to make choices about whether and when to become a parent or grow a family—or not. That’s freedom.

Vicki Shabo is a senior fellow at New America, a think tank in Washington, D.C., where she focuses on paid family and medical leave and other employment, work-family, and caregiving policies that advance gender, racial and economic equity.