When the Trump administration rolled out its Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) campaign, much of the media focused on its public health front: addressing childhood chronic illness, improving nutrition, and reducing toxins. But hidden beneath the polished language of “health” is what critics call the “Baby Boom” agenda, a push to increase birth rates among “traditional families” which MAHA plans to accomplish by cutting off access to contraception and reproductive health services. Framed as pro-family, this agenda aligns with conservative calls to reverse declining U.S. birth rates by encouraging childbirth and restricting reproductive choice.Â
Trump and his administration’s push for a baby boom reflects a broader embrace of pronatalism, the belief that the state should encourage higher birth rates to secure socioeconomic advantages for the future. Economically, more children today mean more workers tomorrow. More workers will help the U.S. to sustain programs like Social Security, which is top of mind for Americans after the HR1 “Big Beautiful Bill” cuts raised doubts about its long-term solvency. A surge in births could also expand the tax base, bolster the labor force, and ease the strain of an aging population. But Trump’s framing of pronatalism goes beyond dollars and demographics; he ties it to his vision of a “traditional family,” where marriage, childbearing, and gender roles are held up as central to restoring American greatness. This intertwining of fiscal arguments with cultural conservatism underscores how the baby boom push is as much ideological as it is economic. What is most concerning is that the Trump administration and its best friend, The Heritage Foundation (creator of Project 2025), plan to bring about a baby boom not through education, but by force.
Rollbacks to family planning services and contraception access are already being felt. In March 2025, the administration withheld Title X funding in 23 states, directly affecting Planned Parenthood and other providers that serve millions of low-income patients. In May, it paused another $27.5 million in family planning grants, disrupting services at 11 Planned Parenthood affiliates and several Title X programs. In a devastating move, nearly $10 million worth of contraceptives earmarked for distribution abroad were incinerated instead, even after nonprofits offered to take them. And in its FY 2026 budget, the administration proposed eliminating the entire $286 million Title X program.
Access to birth control isn’t just about preventing pregnancy. It’s about controlling one’s future. Students depend on low-cost or free contraception for pregnancy prevention, menstrual regulation, and other health needs. While sex education and reproductive health programs are typically funded by state and local governments or by private institutions’ endowments, the Trump administration has already proven that they are not above forcing intervention into private university affairs. If the administration is willing to weaponize federal funds to punish DEI programming, there’s little reason to think reproductive health resources on campus would be spared. Programs like BWell and SHAG, which provide contraception, education, and health referrals, could easily be next on the chopping block if the Baby Boom Agenda continues to gain traction.
So, what can students do in response to the Baby Boom Agenda’s attack on reproductive autonomy? First, they can support Planned Parenthood and similar organizations that are on the front lines providing reproductive health education and family planning resources while fighting back against funding cuts. Donating and amplifying advocacy campaigns make a tangible difference. Second, students can invest in campus programs by attending BWell and SHAG events, volunteering, and helping spread awareness so these resources stay strong. Finally, students must recognize that reproductive rights are political rights. Voting in local and national elections, holding lawmakers accountable, and joining student-led advocacy efforts are crucial in protecting autonomy.