in the trenches/population

 

7. On the Other Hand...

Two Advocates Talk About Immigration:

 

FOCUS ON LIFESTYLES, NOT IMMIGRANTS
by Alida Barletta, National Immigration Forum

As the immigration debate in the United States heats up, some would have us believe that immigrants are the cause of many of our nation's environmental ills. Whether it's dirty air, vanishing species or spoiled rivers, these folks argue that immigrants are to blame. As a result, they want to slam shut the door on legal immigrants--the very people who help bring energy, ideas and hard work to our country.

While it's clear that passions can make this debate very emotional, it's important to stay grounded in the facts. And the facts tell us that the basic problem isn't immigrants' numbers, but Americans' behavior:

• In the United States, we have 5% of the world's population but we produce 25% of the world's carbon-dioxide emissions--the primary source of the "greenhouse effect."
• Our population produces more solid waste than the combined populations of China and India, which total over one and a half billion people.
• We consume energy at 11 times the world's average.

What accounts for this? Well, it's our lifestyles, our behavior.

Naturally, all people concerned with our nation's environment are searching for ways to limit the damage to our land, air, water and wildlife. What's unfortunate is that this quest sometimes leads well-meaning people to unfairly and unproductively blame immigrants.

Of course we must pay attention to population growth. But singling out one group of people merely because of their place of birth isn't right or useful. Immigrants haven't caused our environmental problems, so they shouldn't be blamed for the environmental struggles we confront today. (The reason immigrants are being blamed? Not because their habits are any more wasteful than those of native-born Americans. Not because their presence is any more damaging to the environment. But, because, in a political climate which tolerates scapegoating, immigrants make an easy target.)

Slamming the door shut on legal immigrants won't solve our environmental problems, and its naive to latch onto such a false notion. Nor will stopping immigrants at our national border reduce overpopulation environmental degradation globally.

All Americans--whether foreign-born or native-born--need to be educated about environmental stewardship and the need to change our behavior. Policies and values that encourage overconsumption and overdevelopment--expending non-renewable resources and damaging sensitive ecosystems--have much more impact on our environment than immigrants seeking a better life for themselves and their families.

The proper targets for our concerns and our action are wasteful individual behavior, large-scale industrial pollution, and dangerous anti-environmental legislation.

Humane and generous legal immigration policies and a sustainable environment are not mutually exclusive. With careful stewardship, better public education, changed individual behavior, and stronger governmental regulations and enforcement, our environment can be safeguarded and our natural heritage preserved. Immigrants can be--and want to be--part of this important process.

 

 

WHY WE NEED TO REDUCE US LEVELS OF IMMIGRATION
by Sharon Stein, Negative Population Growth

When people think about overpopulation, they probably think of China and India-- the two most populous countries in the world. Probably very few people think about the United States, but they should.

The US population of nearly 270 million people makes it the third most populous nation in the world with a growth rate higher than most other industrialized countries. Current projections call for US population to soar to more than 400 million by the year 2050. Such an increase is the equivalent of adding 48 cities the size of Chicago during the lifetime of today's young Americans.

This trend should alarm you. It means increased pressure for more development, more growth, more urban sprawl and more environmental damage. Consider how our current population size is already taking its toll on the environment:

• More than 90% of all old growth forests in the US have been cut down.
• About 50% of all US wetlands have been lost. Wetland loss is highest in areas with higher growth rates (and therefore more rapid development) like California, where 93% of all wetlands have been destroyed.
• At least 500 US species have gone extinct and 700 are currently listed as threatened or endangered.

Future growth will only further threaten our precious wildlife and natural resources. Our failure to address US population growth also makes it tough for us to convince other countries to stabilize their populations. And because Americans consume far more resources--per capita and as a whole--than people in other countries, our impact on the global environment is disproportionately huge. Adding one person to the United States is the global-environmental equivalent of adding two or three dozen people to poor countries."

While it is tempting to view issues like population and immigration as "global" problems that transcend national boundaries, in fact nearly all environmental problems (including atmospheric ones like the release of chloroflurocarbons and hydrocarbons) can only be solved by action at the national level. For the United States, thinking and acting locally means stabilizing our population through reduced fertility and immigration.

We need to encourage smaller families. If most mothers stopped at two children, our fertility rate would drop from the present average of 2.1 per woman to 1.5 per woman (because some women remain childless or have only one child).

Second, we need to reduce immigration. Immigration is likely to be the overwhelming prime determinant of future US population trends. According to demographers Leon Bouvier and Lindsey Grant, nearly 90% of all US population growth in the next century will be attributable to post-1970 immigration. In addition, immigration itself has been increasing the overall US fertility rate as new arrivals tend to have large families.

To stabilize US population as quickly as possible, we should reduce immigration to 100,000 a year from current levels of nearly one million. This could be achieved through improved laws that would ensure both a humane policy and one in which nearly all newcomers would be lawfully present.

 

More on Population:
Table of Contents | Twelve Hundred Words or Less... | Web Resources
Activist Groups | Voices | New in the Literature
Hotspots | On the Other Hand... | Funders