population

The 22 million non-citizens in this country (including many here illegally) are having a huge impact on election of representatives to the U.S. Congress.  This is because apportionment of House seats to each state and the drawing of House district lines are based on total population, not on citizenship.

A new report by the Center for Immigration Studies concludes:

“The profound impact of non-citizens can be seen in the 12 districts with the lowest share of citizens, which have roughly the same population of voting-age U.S. citizens as the nine districts with the highest citizen shares. This means Americans in the high-citizen districts have only nine representatives in Congress while those in the lowest-citizenship districts have 12, even though the combined populations of citizens are roughly equal.”

The rule about apportionment is based on the Constitution, section 2 of the 4^th Amendment.  There has been much debate about its interpretation, and whether it’s rightfully applied.  The CIS study makes it obvious that the rule gives states with large numbers of non-citizens an advantage over other states in Congressional matters, which is unjust to citizens and harmful to the sovereignty of the nation.

Table 1 from an earlier CIS study shows, for each state, the apportionment of House seats after the 2020 Census, assuming different populations were not present.  Under each of the assumptions, the table shows that Oregon will have 6 Representatives, a gain of 1 seat over the current number. 

The source of Oregon’s general population increase is a mixture of migration of citizens from other states (32%)  and immigrants (30%), as reported here.  The large migration from other states is likely often related to excessive immigration and overcrowding in the other states.

“California is by far the more recent state of residence for those who move to Oregon, followed by Washington, Illinois, New York, and Texas. These are all states that have seen significant increases in their population, driven in large-part by immigration. Of those who moved to Oregon as an adult from another state, 44% said they did so ‘seeking a better quality of life.’”-- https://www.numbersusa.com/blog/numbersusa-study-population-growth-and-sprawl-oregon

As a FAIR blog comments: “Without a doubt this [Congressional apportionment] is one of the key reasons why the Democrats have been pushing – with the support or acquiescence of cheap labor corporatist Republicans – open borders and mass immigration. After all, during the 2018 midterm elections, almost 90 percent of House districts with a foreign-born population above the national average were won by Democrats. …

“… A persuasive case can be made that the Department of Commerce – which is responsible for conducting the census – can indeed exclude illegal aliens from the census population count (and that the Constitution did not mean for them to be included in the first place). Unfortunately, the DOC has so far refused to do so, for which it was sued by the state of Alabama and Rep. Mo Brooks (R-AL). Alabama certainly had a good reason to sue, for counting illegal aliens would deprive it of a congressional seat and an Electoral College vote. The bottom line is that states with small foreign-born/non-citizen populations, and in particular those with less illegal alien inhabitants, should not be punished by losing representation.”     Read more about Congressional voting is skewed against citizens; fix needed

A new report from Portland State University's population research center shows how much Oregon’s population has increased recently.  The numbers are concerning for many reasons.  Below is part of an alert from the Sustainability project of Numbers USA, with links to a poll being conducted now by The Oregonian on this subject.

VOTE: "Should Oregon encourage more people to move here or discourage them?"

The Oregonian reports:

Oregon has more than 4 million residents, growing by 41,000 in the past year. Of those tens of thousands of new Oregonians, 86%, or about 35,000, moved here from somewhere else. That's far more than the people who entered the state fresh from the womb.

Nationally, immigration is projected to account for the majority of U.S. population growth. Most of Oregon's growth is coming from other states, including states that are more directly impacted by immigration. Native Californians, for instance, make up 1 out of every 7 people in Oregon, according to channel 9 ABC News:

...according to Realtor Ben Fogelson, the migration of people to Oregon creates some negatives for the local communities. Fogelson said out-of-state home buyers, like those from California, out-buy local Oregonians.

According to the City of Eugene, the city's median income is $44,000 and according to the U.S. Census Bureau, California's median income is $80,000. So Californians have a greater chance of being able to buy an average Eugene's home, which is priced at $315,000.

UPDATE, 12-8-2019

The Oregonian’s poll has been closed for some time now. 

The final results were:

#ComeOnIn      7.2%

#GoAway        92.8% Read more about Should Oregon’s population continue to grow?

Enormous levels of immigration over recent decades have caused wages for all U.S. workers to fall behind. Large numbers of citizens’ wages are now so low that they live from payday to payday and cannot save anything for emergencies or for a comfortable retirement. We see widespread homelessness due partly to rents beyond the reach of many low-paid workers.

Who’s responsible for these developments?  Congress sets the immigration laws, including numbers of immigrants.  Oregon’s Congressional delegation has consistently voted for increases in immigration, lax-to-no enforcement of immigration law, and expensive benefits to illegal aliens, enticing further illegal immigration.

To see the Oregon delegations’ grades over their entire careers, click here.
Here are their grades based on their recent voting records in Congress, as documented by NumbersUSA:

F- :  Senator Jeff Merkley, Senator Ron Wyden, Representatives Suzanne Bonamici, Earl Blumenauer, Peter DeFazio, Kurt Schrader

B  :  Representative Greg Walden

Senator Merkley is up for reelection next year, as are all of Oregon’s 5 Representatives.

===============================

Labor Day: Four Decades of Dramatic CEO Income Growth; Peanuts for Workers

By Joe Guzzardi, Progressives for Immigration Reform,  August 29, 2019

Excerpts:

A recent Economic Policy Institute Study titled “CEO Compensation Has Grown 940% since 1978” is a Labor Day lament for American workers whose wages during the same period have only increased a meager 12%. EPI’s analysis found that this exorbitant, unconscionable earnings differential is the major income inequality contributor, and has persisted through equally indifferent Democrat and Republican administrations. …

CEOs have unquestionably taken full advantage of their power to enrich themselves, and suppress lower-echelon employee wages. But another variable that contributes to 40 years of flat wages for hourly workers is the executive suite’s addiction to cheap, foreign labor. With what has been an unbroken inflow of illegal immigrant and legal guest workers, between 750,000 and 1 million annually, corporations have no incentive to increase domestic workers’ salaries – and they haven’t. …

That immigration grows the economy is the age-old, half-truth argument. Sure, more people and more workers create a bigger economy. But immigration does not help the per capita income. Immigration’s benefits accrue to the immigrants and to their employers, and not the general public. The traditional solution to filling job openings is to offer higher wages, not import more cheap labor. With more than 6.1 million people unemployed, that pool should be tapped first.

Congress will soon reconvene, but as it has been for too many legislative sessions, creating a fairer immigration system that protects instead of harms American workers isn’t on the agenda.

------------

Read the complete article here. Read more about Labor Day, Sept. 2, 2019: Four decades of peanuts for workers, courtesy of Congress

by  Tim Murray

Maybe you haven’t heard the terrible news. The United States, like almost every nation on the planet, is in serious population overshoot. This is a vastly different world than the one Emma Lazarus lived in. Hers was an America of seemingly unlimited resources. Ours is one of Limits to Growth.

Yes, there are still vast tracts of America that are sparsely populated. But it is not about how many people a nation can contain but how many it can sustain. The United States has a limited ecological carrying capacity, and there is every indication that it has been exceeded.

That is not only a disaster for us, but a catastrophe for the world. Put it this way. The very last thing that Mother Nature needs is another American consumer. Migration from less developed countries to developed nations like ours has a “multiplier” effect. The average migrant to the United States, for example, quadruples his GHG emissions upon arrival, and this applies to the consumption of resources as well. This is not surprising. After all, most immigrants come here precisely because they want to consume more. They want to enjoy the good life, or at least a materially better life, for themselves and their children.

To prospective immigrants I would say this. Our working poor and IT workers do not need your competition. Our bulging prisons and crowded classrooms cannot accommodate you. Our fruit and vegetable crops do not need you to harvest them. Our service and hospitality sector does not need your labour, nor does the home construction industry. We have Americans to do those jobs. All they need is a decent wage, and without immigration, there is a good chance that they would get it.

The era of smokestack industries and family farms is over. The era of A. I. and robots is soon to unfold. The demand for menial labor will plummet. We will be hard put to employ our working poor, never mind the global poor that Emma Lazarus and her modern day equivalents would welcome. In other words, your services will not be required.

So here’s some advice. Turn around and go back from whence you came. If things are still too rough at home, chances are that you can find suitable sanctuary in a country located in the same region. And if you do manage to make it back, could you please convey this message to your compatriots: Take responsibility for your family size. Understand that scarcity and the conflict that issues from it are in a large part a consequence of your nation’s runaway population growth. If your nation cannot grow the pie, it can, through aggressive family planning programs, increase the size of per capita “slices” by reducing the number of diners at the table.

I think you are a victim of a misunderstanding. The Statue of Liberty was meant to tell you that liberty, democracy and the rule of law can set the citizens of your country free. It was a prescription for good government, not an invitation to come and settle here. The Lazarus poem was an add-on twenty years after the statue was erected, and not congruent with the statement that the Statue was making. Immigration and liberty are apples and oranges.

In fact, higher population density requires more regulations and laws. Population growth is inversely correlated to liberty. As Isaac Asimov said in his famous “bathroom” metaphor. If there is only one tenant and one bathroom in an apartment, the tenant has “freedom of the bathroom”. He can access the bathroom at any time. But once another tenant or tenants come to share that same apartment, the original occupant must compete to use the bathroom. Rules of use or etiquette ensue. Tenants have no unrestricted freedom to use the bathroom whenever they like. And the more tenants who move in, the more restricted the residents will be.

Perhaps a name change would clarify the message. You have heard of the Statute of Limitations. I think Lady Liberty should be rechristened as the Statue of Limitations, and her torch be replaced by a stop sign.

Published by the Council of European Canadians
Read the full article here.

A recent Gallup poll found that more than 750 million adults around the world say they would like to move to another country if they had the opportunity, and the U.S. is the most desired destination. 

Our country is already adding one international migrant (net) every 34 seconds, according to the U.S. Census Bureau’s Population Clock.  For some decades now, immigration levels here have been over 1 million annually.  SO … now people everywhere are complaining about traffic congestion, insufficient housing, overcrowded schools, etc. 

Consider that birth rates of native-born citizens have been at or below replacement level since the 1970’s.  It’s obvious that the true cause of the huge population growth is excessive immigration.  Social and business pressures have more or less silenced public discussion, but some intrepid souls continue to speak out.

Thanks to Jerry Ritter for writing and successfully getting this letter printed in the Eugene Register-Guard:

Sanctuary policy at the root of exploding class sizes, letter to the editor by Jerry Ritter, in the Register-Guard, Eugene OR, December 25, 2018.

There’s been a lot of ink lately on class sizes in Oregon.

Increased class sizes are primarily the result of population growth. Most of Oregon’s population growth is due to in-migration: domestic and foreign, legal and illegal.

Oregonians embraced continued encouragement of illegal immigration to our state by defeating Measure 105. So the welcome mat (sanctuary policy) stays out for people who have no right to be here. The Register-Guard’s editors proudly proclaimed on Nov. 27 that “Oregon has welcomed countless immigrants and refugees.”

I have no problem with legal immigrants, but I must ask sanctuary supporters, how does encouraging ILLEGAL immigration to Oregon help with class sizes? How does it reduce the gridlock on our roads? How does it lower our carbon footprint? How does it relieve the strain on social services (most immigrants receive some form of welfare)? How does it impact our housing crisis? Would they be willing to provide the funding to support one or more migrant families?

With the critical shortage of affordable housing in California and a continuing flood of illegal immigrants into that state, what do you suppose that means for Oregon and Washington with their welcome mats out?

Jerry Ritter, Springfield

Roy Beck, of NumbersUSA, has written for years about the need to curtail overall immigration.  See his updated summary at:  https://www.numbersusa.com/blog/new-projections-warn-much-more-congested-future-if-immigration-policies-arent-changed

Statement of DHS Secretary Nielsen, 12/26/2018: "Our system has been pushed to a breaking point by those who seek open borders. …”   Read more about The population explosion - cause and effect

Should illegal aliens have a major influence on who gets elected to Congress?  Most citizens would probably say No.

But illegal alien advocates and open-borders enthusiasts say Yes.

Population figures reported in the decennial Censuses determine apportionment of seats in Congress.  Too, each state’s electoral vote in presidential elections is tied to the number of seats it has in the House of Representatives.  So accurate figures on the number of citizens are very important.

Pres. Trump’s Secretary of Commerce, the agency which directs the Census Bureau, proposes to reinstate a question in the 2020 Census asking whether respondents are U.S. citizens.   Prior decennial census surveys of the U.S. consistently asked citizenship questions up until 1950.  

The 2020 Census would ask: “Is this person a citizen of the United States?”

Oregon’s Attorney General Rosenbaum joined a lawsuit by several states to block inclusion of the question. The lawsuit was announced soon after California had also sued to block inclusion of the question, and needless to say, Rosenbaum did not ask Oregon citizens what they think.

Kansas’ Secretary of State Kris Kobach, a lawyer with expertise in immigration matters, sheds light on the subject in an interesting Breitbart article posted recently.  Two excerpts:

“Counting illegal aliens allows a state with millions of illegal aliens to unfairly inflate the number of congressional seats and electoral votes it has. Indeed, if the leadership of the state has little regard for the rule of law – as is the case in California – it creates a perverse incentive for the lawless state to invite more illegal aliens to come in. …

“ … California’s arguments are weak, and the lawsuit is a loser. The federal government will prevail, if not in the district court, then on appeal. But the ferocity of the backlash from the Left demonstrates just how important the citizenship question is. America’s willful ignorance concerning the number of citizens and the number of aliens in the country must end.” Read more about Battle over a Census question is more important than you might think

FAIR writer Kenric Ward dissects the figures from a new report on expenditures resulting from large numbers of immigrant children in the public schools.  Overly-generous immigration policies of recent administrations are costing state taxpayers in the U.S. nearly $60 BILLION this year alone in education expenses for immigrant children.

“Five states — Arkansas, Kentucky, North Carolina, South Carolina and Tennessee — each saw their English Learner populations more than double between 2000 and 2014.” 

See excerpts from the FAIR blog below.

Immigration Policies ​Weigh Heavily on U.S. Schools

by Kenric Ward, Federation for American Immigration Reform,  Nov. 7, 2017

America’s immigration policies are amplifying the perennial pleas for more public school funding.

Each year, an estimated 5 million refugees and immigrants – legal and illegal – are enrolled at K-12 campuses with a variety of special needs. More than 175,000 unaccompanied children settled in the U.S. since 2014, with some 18,000 arriving in just 10 counties last year.

A new report by the Migration Policy Institute runs down these pupils’ high-cost needs. Going far beyond the basics of learning English, the list includes mental-health care, legal representation, “socioemotional services,” even “housing rights.”

This naturally necessitates a growing phalanx of providers inside and outside the classroom. Surveying widely varying literacy rates among the new arrivals, “Beyond Teaching English” advises districts to check the “linguistic and cultural competence of staff.”

 How big is the challenge? FAIR estimates that public schools will spend $43,396,433,856 serving children of illegal aliens this year – a massive unfunded mandate. Folding in the costs of legal immigrant pupils, FAIR said the tab totaled $59.8 billion.

A recent sampling of 27 high schools found 9,000 refugee/immigrant students speaking 170-plus languages. “Foreign languages are a cause for celebration,” an MPI researcher said, echoing the mantra of Washington’s immigration enthusiasts.

Amid the celebration, however, the MPI study never addresses the actual costs of the party. Not a single dollar sign appears in the 36-page report …

The failure to address the fiscal impact of immigration is shared by federal politicians and policymakers who craft immigration policy with little or no regard to the downstream financial consequences. Under U.S. Department of Education edicts for minimum language proficiency, high school graduation cycles are creeping up to five or even six years among immigrants, according to the MPI report. …

The federal Office of Refugee Resettlement issues modest School Impact Grants to 39 state and charitable agencies.

It’s mere chump change compared to the $59.8 billion spent educating immigrant children. a cost shouldered almost exclusively by state and local taxpayers. …

Doubling down on the unsustainable situation, Sugarman’s Migration Policy Institute and like-minded groups are busy building a cottage industry to lobby for evermore immigration-induced entitlements, at whatever cost. Expect tax bills to rise accordingly. Read more about A million here, a million there - and the billions mount up fast for school costs

ImmigrationReform.com

Posted by Catalina Lehmann

On November 2, England’s Prince William spoke in London and warned about the dire consequences of overpopulation worldwide, especially as it relates to wildlife protection and species preservation. The event was sponsored by the Tusk Trust. The Tusk Trust protects African wildlife.

“We are going to have to work much harder, and think much deeper, if we are to ensure that human beings and the other species of animal with which we share this planet can continue to co-exist,” he said. Prince William is courageously venturing into the oft-ignored issue of overpopulation.

We should take our cues from Prince William’s leadership.

According to the United States Census Bureau, the current U.S. population totals over 326 million. Shockingly, unless immigration is reduced, the nation’s population will climb to nearly 400 million by 2050. That’s a 22 percent increase in just 33 years! America does not have enough available resources to sustain a population this size without further damaging the environment from growing development related pressures. Though rarely discussed, the reality is that we must curb future immigration in order to save our country’s remaining wildlife for future generations.

Which is one reason why the RAISE Act, now pending in the Senate, makes such good sense.

Phasing down levels of legal immigration will help stabilize the U.S. population in time. The RAISE Act would reduce legal immigration by 50 percent. Immigration would become manageable because the RAISE Act ends chain migration and restores our nation’s ability to determine its demographic destiny. Prince William understands the need for population stabilization – why can’t our own congressional leadership?

http://immigrationreform.com/2017/11/03/prince-william-breaks-taboo-speaks-overpopulation/ Read more about Prince William Breaks a Taboo: Speaks Out Against Overpopulation