Poverty or progeny? In a nation that was founded on legacy and the pursuit of happiness, that sounds like a pretty dystopian choice. Parents of newborns should not have to choose between leaving their 2-week-old behind as they return to work, or indigence and food stamps. But for many new parents, this is exactly the choice they have to make.

Since the ’90s, the law has required larger companies to offer mothers three months off, but it does not require them to be paid. It’s nice to know the job will be there for you, but only if you can afford three months without wages. And when 40% of Americans are unable to cover an unexpected $400 expense, you can imagine how inaccessible this “generous offer” really is.

Recommended Stories

• Meghan Markle's haters don't understand childbirth
• Reclaiming June for the family
• A robot will never be your best friend

Overall, only 27% of workers have access to paid family leave, and that percentage is concentrated among more elite companies and industries. Only 8% of hospitality workers and 7% of food service workers have access to any paid time off after the birth of a child. An alarmingly high percentage of new working mothers are forced to return to their jobs within two weeks of giving birth. This has obvious health repercussions for them, but also affects their child’s social and emotional development.

That’s why President Donald Trump’s first tax cuts in 2017 offered companies real incentives to pay their workers for up to 12 weeks of leave to care for a newly born or adopted child. One of these was the 45S credit, which reimburses employers 25% of the wages they offer to their employees taking paid family and medical leave, up to 12 weeks. But these tax incentives are set to expire at the end of this year, leaving many mothers in the lurch yet again.

Offering 12 weeks is not unreasonable; Trump and congressional Republicans decided it should be the standard for federal employees in 2019. But some people grumble about the idea of the government offering any economic help to families, no matter how reasonable the proposal might be. This is silly. 

Welcoming a new child is one of the most joyful and important moments in many people’s lives, and no new mother should be forced to leave her newborn after only a week or two because she can’t pay for food or housing otherwise. 

But if fiscal hawks insist on talking about it in economic terms, there’s an answer there, too. 

All the abstract-sounding figures economists like to talk about, such as gross domestic product, the stock market, and the federal deficit, rely on actual people doing actual things. And the sad fact is that the United States, like much of the world, is on the track of consistent population decline.

At the current rate, assuming we don’t simply patch our declining population by importing more people, each American generation is on track to be about three-quarters of the size of the previous one.

The facts are pretty simple. You can’t have an economy if you don’t have people. And you can’t fix a deficit if you don’t have an economy. Other marginal effects on economic metrics should take a backseat to the five-alarm fire of the birth rate situation. Labor force participation is important, but labor force existence is crucial. 

And there’s another reason, potentially more convincing, for politicians to pursue pro-family economic policies: They are enormously popular. A poll in the past couple of months found that one proposal for paid family leave — having the federal government fund six months for new parents — was backed by a whopping 40-point margin, with 62% in support compared to only 22% in opposition. Americans support a wide array of pro-family policy proposals by similarly large margins; they recognize, even if politicians do not, that families are good and we should help them out when possible.

Maybe that’s why Republicans and Democrats are jumping on board. Already, a bipartisan bill, the Paid Family and Medical Leave Tax Credit Extension and Enhancement Act, exists to extend and strengthen the tax credit Trump set up in 2017. More than that, the recent budget legislation coming out of the House Ways and Means Committee not only makes the 2017 TCJA 45S credit permanent, but also expands it to include employers who use paid family leave insurance credits (usually small businesses), makes the credit available in every state, and lowers the employee work requirement from one year to six months.

IF TRUMP REALLY WANTS TO RAISE BIRTHRATES, HE NEEDS TO SUPPORT FAMILIES

This would be an amazing win for families. Meanwhile, a coalition of faith and nonprofit organization leaders led by former Republican Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum and organized by the American Principles Project wrote a letter calling for the 45S credit to be continued.

It’s rare for a policy idea to check all of these boxes at once. Morally right, economically valuable, and popular? It’s almost unheard of. This should be a no-brainer. Let’s use this political and popular momentum to ensure that families have the resources they need today to guarantee the American legacy of tomorrow.

Sandra Asuncion is the director of government affairs for the American Principles Project.