228-233 Haas-Wilson

reproductive age.3 However, other empirical evidence has indicated that state abortion restrictions have no such impact.4 The relationship between state-level abortion policies and birthrates is even murkier. Since the birthrate is the product of the pregnancy rate and the ratio of births to pregnancies, state abortion policies may affect birthrates by influencing one or both of these factors. Theory suggests that abortion restrictions may increase the second factor and decrease the first. If levels of sexual activity and contraceptive use remain constant, policies that increase the cost of obtaining an abortion may reduce abortion rates and thus, by increasing the ratio of births to pregnancies, result in higher birthrates. It has been argued, however, that because increasing the cost of abortion raises the costs of engaging in sexual activity, abortion restrictions may lessen sexual activity and thereby reduce pregnancy rates and birthrates.5 This argument assumes that individuals have information on abortion restrictions prior to engaging in sexual activity. A related view is that the legalization of abortion increased the level of sexual activity among all women (including those who are opposed to abortion).6 According to this argument, if women who are willing to obtain abortions increase their level of sexual activity as the costs of abortion decrease, then those who are opposed to abortion will feel more pressure to be sexually active in order to maintain their relationships. In this case, decreasing the costs of abortion may increase the birthrate. However, adherents of this view Deborah Haas-Wilson is associate professor of economics, Smith College, Northampton, Mass. The author thanks Stanley Henshaw, Ted Joyce, Roger Kaufman, Phillip Levine, Robert Ohsfeldt and Mark Wilhelm for helpful comments. Women’s Reproductive Choices: The Impact of Medicaid Funding Restrictions