default avatar
Welcome to the site! Login or Signup below.
Logout|My Dashboard

Immigration key to population growth

Font Size:
Default font size
Larger font size

Posted: Friday, December 6, 2002 10:00 pm | Updated: 2:42 pm, Mon Mar 19, 2012.

In a Nov. 23 editorial headlined "Challenges that we must face," the News-Sentinel named overpopulation as one of the most pressing social issues of our era.

The article stressed the complexity of dealing with overpopulation, linked too many people to ever-increasing urban sprawl and pointed out that one reason for America's huge increase in population over the past three decades is "immigration from places where the birth rate is much higher than ours."

That is to say, for the last 30 years, Americans have been having replacement level families - two children per family on average. The average number of children in an immigrant family is nearly four.Joe Guzzardi

Immigrant family size is an important and underestimated factor in population growth. Using present immigration levels as a guideline, the U.S. can anticipate that the total immigrant population - legal and illegal - will increase by 70 million between today and 2050.

But because of children born to immigrants, the total immigration-related increase in U.S. population during the same period will be more than 95 million. Since those children will be U.S. born, they will be American citizens and thus referred to in some population studies as part of "a natural increase." This is an enormously misleading statement that can be effectively used - as we will soon see - by those who want to trivialize immigration's impact.

The News-Sentinel piece demonstrated a good understanding of overpopulation. Imagine, then, my surprise when the editorial recommended "Putting the Pieces Together," a 27-page report compiled by Washington, D.C.'s Urban Land Institute. According to the News-Sentinel, the report, which suggests ways to improve how California grows, is "stimulating."

In truth, "Putting the Pieces Together" is a transparent hodge-podge of politically correct nonsense without a snowball's chance of having the slightest impact on the crisis that is California growth.

As anyone with two eyes in his head can tell you, to intelligently discuss California's growth, you must - impossible though it is for many - include the consequences of mass immigration.

In my column last week, I referenced a new study by Dr. Steven A. Camarota of the Center for Immigration Studies titled "Immigration in 2002, A Snapshot" which revealed that, according to the U.S. Census Current Population Survey, more than 650,000 legal and illegal immigrants have come to California between January 2000 and March 2002.

On June 19, 2001, Camarota testified before the House Judiciary Committee on the relationship between unchecked immigration and urban sprawl and congestion. Using the conservative middle level census projection of 70 million people added by immigration over the next 50 years will, according to Dr. Camarota, require approximately 30 million new housing units. Remember that this is a conservative projection; the Census Bureau has historically erred on the low side.

Let's use our heads. Each of the 1,700 daily new arrivals to California will require housing, transportation, schools and roads. If the Urban Institute wants to publish glossy brochures pledging its dedication to preserving farmland and advocating "smart growth," fine. But those are nothing but empty words unless federal immigration policy is addressed.

Look around - wherever in California you may live - and point out any evidence of smart growth. California's growth has converted prime agricultural land into housing tracts which has led to increased traffic, pollution and a vastly deteriorated quality of life.

Residents of the San Joaquin Valley are painfully aware of population growth's price. The cities that make up the Valley - Bakersfield, Fresno, Modesto, Stockton, Sacramento and our own Lodi - are experiencing faster growth than Los Angeles County.

And if you don't think that things can change before your very eyes, the American Farmland Trust reminds us that a mere 40 years ago, Los Angeles was the most productive agricultural county in America.

Lodi is coping as best it can with overpopulation's burden. But that translates to not very well.

Wal-Mart, Big Kmart and Target are here. Lowe's is knocking on the door. And 17 housing developments are underway in "lovable, livable Lodi" at this very moment. Five projects were completed within the last two years

And all this "progress" is taking place in our once quaint community of 12 square miles.

Joe Guzzardi, an instructor at the Lodi Adult School, has been writing a weekly opinion column since 1988. He can be reached via e-mail.

Rules of Conduct

  • 1 Use your real name. You must register with your full first and last name before you can comment. (And don’t pretend you’re someone else.)
  • 2 Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually oriented language.
  • 3 Don’t threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
  • 4 Be truthful. Don't lie about anyone or anything. Don't post unsubstantiated allegations, rumors or gossip that could harm the reputation of a person, company or organization.
  • 5 Be nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
  • 6 Stay on topic. Make sure your comments are about the story. Don’t insult each other.
  • 7 Tell us if the discussion is getting out of hand. Use the ‘Report’ link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
  • 8 Share what you know, and ask about what you don't.
  • 9 Don’t be a troll.
  • 10 Don’t reveal personal information about other commenters. You may reveal your own personal information, but we advise you not to do so.
  • 11 We reserve the right, at our discretion, to monitor, delete or choose not to post any comment. This may include removing or monitoring posts that we believe violate the spirit or letter of these rules, or that we otherwise determine at our discretion needs to be monitored, not posted, or deleted.

Welcome to the discussion.

Recent Comments

Posted 1 hour ago by Simon Birch.

article: Letter: The drought is punishment

Rick: Thanks for pointing that out. I've changed it.


Posted 2 hours ago by Walter Chang.

article: Letter: How is free community college g…

"Gruber" Joel is a dedicated FAUXNEWS viewer and that's ok. But I wonder if he prefers Bill O'Reilly over Megyn Kelley? Since…


Posted 2 hours ago by Mike Adams.

article: Letter: Large class sizes are good for …

File this letter with all the ones about global warming isn't really here ("we don't know what the weather will be like in three days.…


Posted 3 hours ago by Rick Houdack.

article: Letter: The drought is punishment

After reading today's deluded rant I sat for some time, thinking about the mind that fervently believes such things. Then I thought of the…


Posted 3 hours ago by Jien Kaur.

article: Letter: Large class sizes are good for …

This is so sad I feel bad for this elderly gentleman who is still living in "the early half of the last century" and has only pro…



Popular Stories



Your News

News for the community, by the community.

Mailing List

Subscribe to a mailing list to have daily news sent directly to your inbox.

  • Breaking News

    Would you like to receive breaking news alerts? Sign up now!

  • News Updates

    Would you like to receive our daily news headlines? Sign up now!

  • Sports Updates

    Would you like to receive our daily sports headlines? Sign up now!

Manage Your Lists