Christy Shaw's picture

Published:  

  by  Christy Shaw

Better keep President Biden's hot air balloon ready for the escape. It's looking more like the Wizard's curtains are being drawn back further to expose the president's delusion that his mass immigration policies can continue alongside his bold environmental protection agenda.

The Administration will soon hold its second sale of leases on federal lands to drill more oil. Understandably, this angers environmentalists, seeing it as a betrayal of the president's campaign promises to address carbon emissions reductions and save 30 percent of lands and waters.

But this Administration has incredibly managed to frustrate members of both political parties and Americans in general who are being told one thing today and then the near opposite on another.

Miranda Devine's rather entertaining article illustrates several of the administration's gaslighting attempts to convince Americans that the ire for their ills is somehow to be understood and believed in the dizzying yes-no-maybe communications to energy companies, blaming Russia entirely for inflation and his administration's ponzi scheme to continue increasing mass-immigration-driven population growth that, (let's not miss this vital point), also increases consumption pressure demands on all natural resources.

Here Devine references some of the Administration's gaslighting shenanigans as Pres. Biden comes face to face with the reality that more people demanding more of any product will require more of that product, even the fossil fuels upon which the U.S. is still so clearly dependent:

As GasBuddy oil-industry analyst Patrick De Haan tweeted: 'White House begs oil companies to improve the situation. Can we drill? We’d rather you not. Can we build a refinery? We’d rather you not. Can we build a pipeline? We’d rather you not. Just make it better.'

Even Amazon gazillionaire Jeff Bezos couldn’t let this gaslighting go. “Ouch,”' he tweeted back. 'Inflation is far too important a problem for the White House to keep making statements like this.'

Not in Biden’s mind. He believes he is a great statesman, making his mark astride the world stage on the alleged 'existential problem of our time,' while pretending to the rubes back home that he feels their pain.

But no one is fooled. Biden’s actions to curtail American production — and consumption — of fossil fuels are deliberate and ideological, just like his disastrous open border policy.

This is not a defense of more or less fossil fuel extraction. Nor is it a snide dismissal of the importance of taking bold actions to reduce carbon emissions, protect wildlife and habitat, or to do what is necessary to reverse the already significant decline in biodiversity overall. And it is also not a referendum on the merits of U.S. involvement, now or in the past leading up to now, of Russia's invasion of Ukraine. I leave the reader to draw their own conclusions on each of these.

It is, however, an indictment of the false ideology we continue to hear from all pro-infinite-growth proponents, the current presidential administration included. Pro-infinite growth advocates refuse to recognize the futility to accomplish anything sustainable in terms of environmental conservation and the quality of life that we cherish. This denial of reality clouds their judgment also to appropriately address current levels of immigration-driven population growth. In fact, the current Administration and its allies are actually pushing the accelerator to the floor on the number of new people entering the country.

The standing total of known southern border crossings is now at 2 million.

Before this Administration's dismantling of nearly all security measures at the southern border, we were already in a state of crisis relative to the numbers. Together, legal and illegal immigration previously saw 1.5 million new immigrants come to the U.S. annually.

There is no rational mind out there, (regardless of one's sympathy for the legitimate desperation of some migrants' personal plight), that should still not feel the alarm bells go off in terms of what it really means for quality of life, the long-term stability of the economy and loss of biodiversity with this many newcomers. Where will they all live? How and where will we produce enough food? Will there be enough water? And most certainly for purposes here we must ask: How will we curb emissions and save enough lands and waters with this many more consumers coming in competition with one another and with wildlife in an already crowded country of 330 million?

The president and all his bipartisan pro-immigration proponents on both sides of the congressional aisle need a lesson in understanding the real impact threats posed from the TOTAL number of people living and arriving here to the environmental and quality of life conditions that are becoming increasingly unstable.

Even the poorest countries having the lowest emissions levels cannot sustainably grow their populations indefinitely. The United States has some of the highest emissions levels and we are developing technologies in carbon sequestration, desalination for water sources, and other innovations which are impressive. But those are only moving the needle slightly on preventing a very real ecological crisis that is NOT existential.

Technology is not keeping pace with population growth in the U.S. And as Roy Beck's timeless gumballs video still rings true today, taking in millions annually will not make a dent in solving the issues of poverty and overpopulation in other countries.

In the U.S. from 1970 to 1980, total U.S. population numbers climbed from 205 million to 227 million, adding a net sum of 22 million in one decade.

From 2010 to 2020 the total numbers added were nearly the same. While it is important here to note an impressive rate of decline from 11 to 7 percent when comparing these two periods, total numbers are still too high for stabilization and those numbers still continue to increase.

We are now 40 years from when we should have implemented the recommendations of the Commission on Population Growth and the American Future (commonly known as the Rockefeller Commission):

"After two years of concentrated effort, we have concluded that in the long run, nonsubstantial benefits will result from further growth of the Nation's population, rather that the gradual stabilization of our population would contribute significantly to the Nation's ability to solve its problems."

The Rockefeller Commission recommended that annual immigration be capped at 400,000 (a minority of the members recommended reducing immigration by 10 percent every year until it was reduced to the 1925-1965 average of 178,000 per year).

Today, July 11, 2022 is World Population Day. We need a U.S. Population Day, one that finally puts into practice population growth and immigration recommendations from President Clinton's Council on Sustainable Development and the Rockefeller Commission. Of all the controversial ways proposed to stabilize population growth, immigration reforms done respectfully, and applied humanely under the rule of law, should be the easiest option to implement and enforce.

CHRISTY SHAW is the Member Services Manager for NumbersUSA

Updated: Mon, Jul 11th 2022 @ 2:38pm EDT

NumbersUSA's blogs are copyrighted and may be republished or reposted only if they are copied in their entirety, including this paragraph, and provide proper credit to NumbersUSA. NumbersUSA bears no responsibility for where our blogs may be republished or reposted. The views expressed in blogs do not necessarily reflect the official position of NumbersUSA.