Really?
How do you get that from the charts?
And if you can say that, then you must say that REAGAN'S handpicked RINO GHW Bush saved... how many?
And the Guttmacher reports went from 1,500,000/yr in 1992 to 1,300,000/yr in 2000, so what, RAPIST IN CHIEF BILL CLINTON SAVED 1 MILLION BABIES? (The CDC numbers are bs)
Or it could be that abortions tend to increase more when economic times are harder, and more people choose life when the future looks better?
Where is the evidence that the President's preference on abortion has an effect on the number of abortions? In fact, the evidence indicates otherwise!
ALL: Note that Sam Paine -- above this comment -- ran a chart for only U.S. abortions...as if presidential policy has no impact upon U.S. taxpayer-paid-for abortions overseas!
Sam, stop embarrassing yourself -- and do some research -- on the "Mexico City policy" which was implemented by Ronald Reagan -- and re-implemented under Bush.
Reagan & Bush were able to impact our taxpayer $ going toward the foreign abortion industry by squelching funds going to them.
Now, to be fair, Romney has said he would re-implement this...so, in reality, this is one apparent genuine distinction between pro-abort Romney and pro-abort Obama.
Just don't try to pretend that a POTUS has no impact on abortions...because just as the Mexico City policy has effected U.S. involvement in the dismemberment of foreign babies, likewise there's ALL kinds of ways a POTUS can influence funding -- or lack of it -- going to the AMERICAN abortion industry.
And on this, all ya gotta know is that Romney left a Planned Parenthood rep on the permanent oversight board for MA RomneyCare. (That tells you how "pro-life" he was -- after his supposed "pro-life" "conversion" in late 2004...) Also, RomneyCare has gone from $50 taxpayer funded abortions in MA to -- in some cases -- paying for 100% of abortions...and these go beyond the court-ordered abortions for "exceptions" that MA had to obey.