Actually, given the massive money spent to build and promot the AMBER alerts, a substantial number (as in 1000%) more children would have been saved from death by spending that money on things like pool safety enforcement, suicide prevention, automobile safety, industrial chemical disposal regulations, etc.
I saw a study a few years ago, that the number of billions of dollars spent on the AMBER alert system would have been more than 10x as effective in almost 30 different government programs at preventing childhood death and serious harm. Sports accidents, car accidents, cancer, poisoning, pool accidents, natural disasters. These are all substantially more risky to children than abduction, but the 5000 kids who die of drowning in swimming pools each year don't make it on the evening news, so they don't seem to matter.
Of course, actually saving kids wouldn't quite placate the Nancy Grace "ZOMG the poor abducted children" crew quite as effectively. They are about sensationalism, not actually helping society.
The reality is "if it was only one child" argument is a red herring, because it indicates "if we didn't do this, we wouldn't do anything". In reality, it is a bunch of competing interests and we have to choose the optimal one. It's not a choice of "this or nothing" but often proponents of these silly programs pitch it that way to garner public sympathy.
I think AMBER alerts are terrible, a waste of money, and merely a balm for busybodies who want the self-affirmation of "helping children" or "catching perverts" when really, we're just chasing after a bunch of jealous boyfriends and ex-husbands most of the time anyway.