|
|
|
Published Wednesday, February 16, 2000, in The State. Flood of immigrants could endanger American society -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I lived in China for two years and there became acutely aware of the political and environmental disadvantages associated with overpopulation. The Chinese regime has implemented desperate and, sometimes, brutal measures just to get their numbers down -- measures supported by every Chinese person I met. I was shocked on my return home to discover that U.S. immigration policy is needlessly putting us into the same boat out of which China is so desperately trying to climb. The wisdom of such a policy should be discussed -- in non-economic terms. Ms. Miller touts the "creative energy" provided by the current record-breaking wave of immigration and claims it is "crucial" to the maintenance of U.S. "creativity." But, between 1925 and 1965, the U.S. experienced practically zero net immigration and, during that time, we successfully prosecuted a great war simultaneously on two fronts, built the largest economy the world has ever seen, began the space program that eventually put a man on the moon, put a halt to the worldwide spread of totalitarianism and -- we invented computers. Yes, immigrants contribute to our growing economy. But, is economic growth the only criterion by which to judge public policy? Is the economic benefit of relentless urban sprawl really worth turning our country into one huge strip mall? Ms. Miller wonders why we placed our billboards in South Carolina and worries that we think South Carolinians are "xenophobic." Our boards were placed in South Carolina because South Carolina is the second primary state. In response to questions I put to them in new Hampshire, both Gore and Bradley have said they support current immigration policy for its "ethnic diversity." They should be asked, at every campaign stop in South Carolina, whether the benefit of importing non-whites into America outweighs the environmental degradation and political instability with which we are sticking America's children. They should be asked whether they would not support the current flood if it were from Europe. The Republicans, like Ms. Miller, seem to support immigration for economic reasons. Both McCain and Bush, again in answer to questions I posed to them in New Hampshire, have noted the hard-working nature of immigrants. No one is disputing that many immigrants work hard; the world is, in fact, full of hard workers. And cheap labor. But is it fair to leave America's children an overcrowded, polluted and increasingly polarized country simply that we might enjoy "cheaper strawberries" today? People will continue to flood into our country until one of two things happens: Either a) we put a stop to it; or b) our country is no more desirable than theirs. We owe it to the young to swallow our greed and choose the first option. Mr. Nelsen is president of Project-USA.org |