Years of progress on domestic energy and environmental issues are being eradicated by near record-high levels of immigration to the U.S., according to a report from a national immigration advocacy group Tuesday.
The Federation for American Immigration Reform’s “U.S. Immigration and the Environment” study, provided to the Washington Examiner, found the steady growth of the U.S. population, 100 million over the past century, has undermined efforts to minimize the nation’s impact on the environment. The current 14 percent share of foreign-born in the country is within striking distance of the early 20th century’s 15 percent, the highest rate ever seen.
“All the gains the U.S. has made through our many conservation initiatives and improved efficiency are being wiped out by mass immigration,” FAIR President Dan Stein said. “Immigration fueled more than half of U.S. population growth in the last 50 years, and will generate three-quarters of it in the next 50 years.”
The group, which opposed efforts by Democrats to reform immigration and supports elements of policy prescriptions typically backed by Republicans, noted that the U.S. has the largest ecological footprint in the world, making its ability to conserve resources even more critical as its population nears 450 to 600 million by the end of the 21st century. President Obama’s commitment to reduce green house gas emissions may be even more challenging because a significant share of the population is coming from overseas.
“Each immigrant who moves to the U.S. on average quadruples his or her global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Even this estimated quadrupling is very conservative because it counts only foreign-born immigrants, not their children born in the U.S.,” the report stated.
“Immigrants in their countries of origin emit on average far less CO2 than the average American. This tends to be especially true if the sending countries have many poor. For example, average Mexicans in Mexico emit about 33 percent as much CO2 as Americans. Indians in India emit less than 4 percent as much CO2. When immigrants come to the U.S., their CO2 emissions tend to rise compared to their country of origin because they tend to travel more by car, eat more meat, buy products with higher embedded energy content, etc. As a result, immigration to the U.S. makes it more difficult for the U.S. to meet its GHG reduction goals.”
The report also cited the National Wildlife Federation, which has warned that “sprawl,” or the spreading of human populations from urban areas to communities that rely on cars, will lead to a 30 percent decrease in the U.S. mainland’s plant and animal species.
Stein, who has led the Washington organization for 13 years, said the country must discuss the connection between immigration and the policies it affects rather than adhere to current thresholds and not considering the implications.
FAIR criticized environmental groups and liberal organizations for putting partisan relationships over reducing immigration rates, which it said would be in the public’s best interest.
“In recent years, many environmental groups that had previously taken strong, common-sense positions in favor of reducing immigration have abandoned their core principles in favor of other political agendas. Given the existential challenges posed by global warming and other threats to the survival of our planet, these groups need to support common-sense population policies now,” Stein said. “It’s completely disingenuous for anyone who is truly concerned about this nation’s sustainability and carrying capacity to continue to ignore the jet engine driving U.S. population growth: immigration.”
Stein proposed the federal government develop an environmental impact statement on the country’s immigration policy to determine what affect it has on population growth and issues such as health care, education and welfare programs. The environmental statement would help determine the country’s future population goals and levels of admittances.
FAIR said immigration levels should be reduced from the current 1.25 million annually to 300,000. That recommendation could be implemented partly by ending the admission of extended family members of initial entrants.
Editor’s note: The author is a former press secretary of FAIR.
