The NYT pretends the move is “puzzling” and puts a reason in the second half of the article.
Prioritizing areas with higher birthrates would, however, send more federal funding to Republican states. South Dakota, Alaska, Nebraska, North Dakota and Texas are among the states with the highest fertility rates, according to data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. States that have the lowest fertility rates include Vermont, Oregon, Rhode Island and New Hampshire, none of which voted for Mr. Trump in the 2024 election.
“Clearly this is helping red states,” said Phillip Levine, an economics professor at Wellesley College who has studied the topic of falling U.S. birthrates.
The other reason is this is Trump making the fascists and fundies happy by mentioning birthrates in red states. I’m actually surprised Trump didn’t have his transportation secretary stooge simply say “The more you vote for Trump - the more we help you.”
I’m actually surprised Trump didn’t have his transportation secretary stooge simply say “The more you vote for Trump - the more we help you.”
It’s just understood at this point.
Isn’t that expected behaviour from an elected politician?
Nah. Democrats bend over backwards to try to be liked by people who loathe them. I’m specifically thinking of Obama’s high speed rail money. Wisconsin and Florida were both given huge grants to build high speed rail, but their tea party governors literally gave it back.
Vote for me more and I’ll help you more. Simple. But… [singsong] maybe maybe maybe maybe - you don’t need to vote for me anymore. I could be president a loooong time.
Oh that’s those libidinal politics I was looking for
Our big wet boy is back
Nothing to do with incentivizing abortion bans either
Bright side here is that you most likely do not want the transportation funds that the Trump admin is giving out. They’re basically just going to be doing freeway expansions.
Just one more lane
It’d be interesting to see in which communities those high birthrates are occurring.
