Powell: Population growth makes our problems harder to resolve

Editor’s note: This op-ed is by Mark Powell, who is the secretary of Vermonters for Sustainable Population.  He lives in Worcester.

Although the U.S. was approaching a stabilized population as recently as 1980, we are now experiencing the longest running growth spurt in the history of the developed world. In spite of this, our nation’s legislative body proposes even more rapid population growth in the form of comprehensive immigration reform. These changes will boost our demographic profile still further beyond our already unsustainable growth. I call on Sen. Patrick Leahy, the chairman of the Judiciary Committee, to truthfully advise the American people of the implications of this legislation for the future growth of our population.

Recently, the White House Council of Economic Advisers endorsed population growth as a remedy for current and future economic woes. “U.S. population growth is projected to fall almost in half over the next three decades,”[i] the report states, but it doesn’t mention that the growth of the past 30 years — the growth implicitly regarded as desirable — has been unprecedented and unsustainable. The report adds, “Immigrants increase the size of the population and thus of the labor force and customer base, making an important contribution to economic growth.”

Although there is much talk these days of America’s declining fertility, the premise of a drastic slowing in our population growth is misleading, as can be readily evidenced by comparing our own growth and that of the European Union. Back in 1980, the combined population of those 27 countries was double the 225 million counted in that year’s U.S Census. Since then, however, the EU population has increased by only 10 percent, while the U.S. grew by 40 percent, adding 100 million people. Under existing policy, the Census Bureau projects 100 million more people by 2060, while the EU will remain virtually unchanged. We will grow even faster with the proposed changes in immigration; many young Americans would probably live to see the U.S. reach half a billion people, a threshold never before crossed by an industrial nation.

The arguments in favor of continued population growth are based on the flawed assumption that only by maintaining past levels of growth can we hope for a more prosperous future. But how well has this rapid growth served us today?

While the national debate about immigration reform focuses primarily on the status of undocumented persons, with a bit of debate about high-skilled and low-skilled visas, impacts on U.S. population growth are virtually ignored. That really needs to be addressed openly, and the White House statement about the economic benefits of population growth begs the question: If adding 100 million more people in 45 years won’t sustain our economy, how many millions more do we need to ensure prosperity?

Not so long ago, many environmentalists publicly spoke about the hazards driven by rapid demographic growth in the world’s largest industrial nation. After all, the more modest population growth in Europe has been paralleled by their growing embrace of renewable technologies and more efficient use of nonrenewables.

Americans, meanwhile, have pursued these advances only reluctantly, greatly magnifying the greenhouse emissions driven by our rapidly increasing numbers. Unfortunately, the scientifically grounded views expressed by a few realistic environmentalists are often subverted by politics. Among progressives, the debate about U.S. population growth has been embargoed by a kind of 21st century Left-wing McCarthyism. Environmentalists who publicly express concern about U.S. growth will quickly face accusations of “green racism.”

The arguments in favor of continued population growth are based on the flawed assumption that only by maintaining past levels of growth can we hope for a more prosperous future. But how well has this rapid growth served us today?

We certainly can’t expect that further growth in our population will alleviate America’s growing economic inequality. The disparity between rich and poor has increased substantially as our population has rapidly grown since the late 1980s, and the middle class is feeling the squeeze. It’s not hard to see why; as the supply of labor has increased, prevailing wages have stagnated relative to the cost of living. This may help to explain why the business community is so enthusiastic about immigration reform.

In the same vein, we struggle today with high unemployment, and millions of workers, including skilled workers, have fallen through the cracks. How does an increase in our workforce, in this difficult economic moment, make it easier to get them back to work?

We certainly should not expect this continued growth to improve our educational outcomes; as the population has rapidly grown over the last quarter-century, we have been falling behind in our math and science scores. It’s true that many of our schools are struggling with declining enrollment, but other schools face crowded classrooms and have trouble recruiting qualified teachers.

This growth in our population has neither reduced our dependence on foreign sources of energy nor decreased our carbon footprint. Even as we develop more efficient technologies for industry and transportation, growth in our population has pushed national energy consumption and greenhouse gas production still higher.

If the federal government really believes that continued rapid population growth is somehow going to make life better for our children and grandchildren, then they need to say so and make that case to the American people. But the White House Council of Economic Advisers should not be pretending that we are in danger of demographic implosion and our economy can only be kept afloat with continued population growth. This deceptive spin calling for continued expansion of our population will make life harder for American families and further disrupt the climate from which our children and grandchildren will have to draw sustenance and seek shelter.


If you read us, please support us.

Comment Policy requires that all commenters identify themselves by their authentic first and last names. Initials, pseudonyms or screen names are not permissible.

No personal harrassment, abuse, or hate speech is permitted. Comments should be 1000 characters or fewer.

We moderate every comment. Please go to our FAQ for the full policy.


Recent Stories

Thanks for reporting an error with the story, "Powell: Population growth makes our problems harder to resolve"
  • Tony Redington

    Agree population growth a problem, but US recent birth rate lowest since the Great Depression…and Vermont grows by a health 11 persons per month based on US Census data and estimates for 2010-2011-2012. We need a twofold approach–radical reduction in resource consumption in the areas of non-sustainable use and continued attention to the U.S. population. All while making efforts at other nations no now involved in the same effort and assisting developing nations into sustainable areas

    Most important, the U.S.–and Vermont-ust change transportation pricing and investments towards rail, bus, and the active modes, walking and bicycling. The huge subsidy of housing–property tax and mortgage interest tax deductions–must stop (Canada has none and they do quite well, thank you).

    Tony Redington

  • Phyllis North

    Thank you for speaking out, Mr. Powell. This is a topic that our leaders refuse to consider, and most environmentalists willingly ignore.

    Why is Leahy pushing for a program that will bring in 33 million more people — the population of Canada — in the next decade?

    This is just what the corporations want: cheap labor. But we already have millions of unemployed American citizens who want jobs. God forbid we should think about their needs.

  • Robert Fireovid

    I agree with Mr. Powell. We humans cannot grow our numbers forever. In a finite world, humanity’s physical growth must stop at some point. Where should that point be? I suspect that few Vermonters want to see their community’s population to double over their lifetimes. Many of us came to Vermont or choose to stay in Vermont because man’s footprint here is more humane – in balance with human communal interaction and with the rest of Creation (our larger community). As our non-renewable resources disappear and even the value of our renewable resources are depleted by climate change, further growth in our population makes absolutely no sense.

  • Rolf Mueller

    It’s a simple matter of arithmetic.
    Unfortunately arithmetic or simplicity seems to be a lost art.

  • Kathy Nelson

    Mr Powell’s article has a very distinct tone of political correctness. Population control is an emotional subject that involves adult responsibility and the proper planning of families. One of the primary factors in both of those issues is women. Throughout the world, and in the US too, women are disenfranchised, un-empowered and even beaten and killed for trying to make good choices about reproduction. It’s something men don’t like to talk about. It’s a hot-button topic that draws religious and cultural fanaticism into the fray. It’s a question of who’s in power and who is not.
    The Earth is a very old ecosystem capable of enforcing its own sense of balance. Most of the species of this planet require male, and female components for reproduction. They balance each other, one does not exist without the other. Stabilization of population on this planet requires that we return to that balance and end male domination and aggression toward women.
    It is also time for women to fully embrace their responsibility to make this world a better place and stop submitting to cultural and religious cruelty.
    I hope Mr. Powell’s organization will be more responsive to the issue of women in the future.

  • Kathy,
    There is no statement of fact or analysis here with which I don’t agree wholeheartedly, but those aspects of population growth were beyond the focus of this particular Op-Ed. Please visit our web page at where you will find a series of broad principles, including the importance of the education and overall empowerment of women across the globe as an important prerequisite for a world where human numbers, and human consumption, are more in balance with the limitations and resources of this finite planet. We also heartily endorse the work of the Population Media Center (, which is headquartered right here in Shelburne, but works to improve living standards and the status of women around the globe.
    For those who wish to know more about the reality of U.S. population growth, which contrasts sharply with the “population-implosion” fantasies of the Wall Street and Washington elite, you can see some of my analysis in video format at
    Mark Powell

  • Charlie Alvin

    I pretty much agree with you all, folks. The legalization of illegal emigrants accompanied by broken promises of securing our boarders has been done time and again and has obviously failed to stop the ever increasing flow of boarder-jumpers. When it comes to emigration, as a society we are constantly cutting off our nose to spite our face. We must learn to properly reward folks who play by the rules, that is our our emigration laws, by bringing the unlawful boarder jumping to a DEAD STOP and expelling those who are already here following a hefty prison sentence meanwhile making their minor children wards of the state, again making the US a land of hope and opportunity where everyone has some chance at what was once “The American Dream.” I know this would cost us money but we are already biting a big bullet, so we may as well bite the right one.

    In addition, we must learn to stop lying to one another about “climate chance.” The climate is doing exactly what it is supposed to do, CHANGE. As I understand, the so-called over abundance of CO2 in our atmosphere is not coming from so-called dirty fuels i.e. heavily scrubbed/filtered emissions from coal-fired power plants, certainly not from the nuclear power plants nor from auto mobiles of industrialized countries. Even blaming fracking for fiery tap water and illnesses has turned out to be rather bogus as it has been learned that methane tainted ground water has been a natural phenomenon in some areas first discovered in the 1930’s, while fracking is a rather new process. Of course it will take time and much testing before we truly learn about the pros and cons of fracking. and as for all highly subjective or emotionally charged bantering that stirs up controversy that sells news papers, I prefer to wait for all the facts before blindly accepting that “The debate is over, the condenses is in.”

    And to popular hist aria, our atmosphere is not bleeding CO2 into our seas and oceans, but rather the other way around. Heat from submarine volcanic activity is consuming Oxygen leaving the waters CO2 rich. Further, the hot lava is causing yet more CO2 to be released from sediment on the floors of the planets seas and oceans which are continually bleeding CO2 into our Atmosphere and is coincidentally heating these bodies of water which in turn are the major cause of ice melt at the Polar caps and else where. In some areas, some of the underwater volcanoes have time and again pierced the
    surface and later recede. One of these ephemeral islands created by the Kavachi volcano in the Solomon Islands has 8 times over the past 60 years pierced the surface only to later recede. Perhaps some of the “myths” about disappearing islands are not really “myths” at all;-). Others are pierced or nearly pierced to surface near Tonga and elsewhere. Some underwater volcanoes create horizontal fissures or ridges as long as 5 miles spewing lava their entire length. Some say about 4,500 of these under volcanoes exist and through some extrapolations of evidence it is estimated that as many as 75,000 (3/4 of the Earth’s volcanoes) may actually exist so it is no wonder that the seas and oceans tend to be warming and rising. These things have been occurring millions of years. We probably know more about the heavens than our own planet.

    If the Human species did not even exist, atmosphere, land and ocean climates would probably be no different. We have survived 200,000 years because of our ability to adapt to ever-changing environment. Not even ice ages have been able to hold us back, and when or if our spices finally does meet it’s doom it will probably be entirely out of hands, altogether. In any case, probably nothing we ever do will stop the planet from evolving. There is a plethora of interesting data regarding these submarine volcanoes available in libraries and the WWW, it just has not yet pierced the murky surface so-called main-stream media.