Immigration expansionists sometimes defend their cheap-labor policies with a globalist posture, but America would set a better example for the international community by demonstrating how a nation cares for its citizens.
Karen Shragg's presentation notes the mathematical fact that immigration policy drives U.S. population growth. She was asked to alter her presentation to bury that fact. She refused. "I would not agree to alter my talk unless it was for scientific reasons."
There is no return from extinction - it is a permanent loss of something of inestimable value. Conventional economic thinking assumes that because immigration grows the population and the economy, more immigration-driven population growth is always good. But urban sprawl and habitat loss increases the risks of species extinction in America. Reducing immigration-driven population growth (e.g., limiting chain migration) is the best way to save our remaining habitat and wilderness areas and to preserve America's diversity of life.
"I think this is the first time I've seen this [immigration] discussion couched in the idea of the strain on our resources...my responsibility is to make sure there's a tomorrow."
Two reviews of publications outside our borders help clarify the work we have to do inside our borders.
During the loose-labor period after the Civil War, European immigrants banded together in unions to stifle competition from Freedmen. But during the tight-labor market of the mid-20th century, unions played an important role in securing the success of the Great Wave and the Great Leveling. Federal immigration policy was an important factor during both periods and the bottom line is all laborers have more power in a tight labor market.
At the time he made his pledge that we would not see "2 million" people at the border, President Biden probably thought keeping border apprehensions below that ignominious mark was a bar he could easily clear. After all, those numbers had never been reached before. But as the Post reports, his administration removed more "guardrails" than they put up. The results have been disastrous.
The population boom in hurricane-prone Florida is an example of the "expanding bullseye effect": More development means more damage.
The United States loses about 1.5 million acres every year (roughly a football field every 30 seconds). Population growth is responsible for most of that loss. With federal immigration policies driving nearly all of projected population growth, Congress and the president have an opportunity every day to stop the destruction of habitats and animals brought about by our own increasing numbers.
Americans are tired of the downstream effects of unsustainable population growth, and support reducing immigration to ease congestion, crowding, and development over America's open spaces. This is true across the nation but one state in particular is waking up to just how out of step its leaders are with the public.