Nativism WatchImmigration

NumbersUSA: blaming immigrants for everything again

Anu Joshi • Sep 25, 2015

NumbersUSA has published a presentation on urban sprawl. We read it so you don’t have to.

On Twitter, NumbersUSA president Roy Beck revealed that his organization will publish a new study on sprawl in the U.S. South.

This wasn’t an entirely unexpected (or new) strategy for the anti-immigrant organization. In April 2014, NumbersUSA published Vanishing Open Spaces: Population Growth and Sprawl in America. It released a companion,Vanishing Open Spaces in Florida: Population Growth and Sprawl in The Sunshine State, in March. Both try to frame the issue of preserving open space and natural habitat by placing the blame on urban sprawl on the backs of immigrants (and their children).

Well, now NumbersUSA has published what appears to be Beck’s full presentation from his Piedmont Sprawl presentation, “When Raleigh and Atlanta collide,” and we read it so you don’t have to.

Let’s walk through the 70 slides together (stay with me, I’ll be quick).

SLIDE 1: A scary graphic of “traffic,” “gridlock,” and “congestion,” asks, “Which factors at fault in emerging Piedmont Megalopolis?” (FYI: a “megalopolis” is an urban region, especially one consisting of several large cities and suburbs that adjoin each other.)

SLIDE 2-3: Why Megalopolises are bad and why we should try to avoid them.

SLIDE 4: Now we’re at the meat of the matter. The two “factors” that cause sprawl: “1.Growth in Per Capita Land Consumption and 2.Population Growth.” I’m going to guess that we’re going to spend most time on that second factor.

SLIDE 5: Invokes the report from President Clinton’s Population and Consumption Task Force of the Council on Sustainable Development, which states: “The United States can’t meet its environmental goals without stabilizing its population.” This will be the theme that runs through the remaining 65 slides – immigrants are to blame for the loss of natural space and urban sprawl. Sound hard to believe? That’s because it is.

NumbersUSA leadership remains committed to their true goal – a whiter nation, by focusing on reducing the population of those who they don’t consider “American” enough.

The Population and Development Program at Hampshire College put it best, “There is no simple correlation between the number of people in the country and the degree of environmental degradation.” NumbersUSA, along with other anti-immigrant groups masquerading as environmental groups, remain committed to their true goal – a whiter nation, by focusing on reducing the population of those who they don’t consider “American” enough.

SLIDE 6 – 19: Maps and statistics to convince you that what NumbersUSA really, really, is concerned about is sprawl, and protecting wildlife, they’ve even included pictures of the birds whose habitats are being destroyed.

SLIDE 20 – 23: Here are all the scientific methods we used to ultimately blame immigrants for all of our environmental and sprawl problems.

SLIDE 24 – 36: Okay, I guess we’ll admit that “Per Capita Consumption” is a factor.

SLIDE 37 – 38: “The Population Factor.” What? This only gets two slides, that can’t be right.

SLIDE 39: “Comparing Factors.” Oh, here we go.

SLIDE 40 – 55: “Piedmont experience displays near-impossibility of stopping loss of habitat…without dealing with rapid population growth.” NEVER SAW THAT COMING. Just kidding, I totally did.

SLIDE 56: “Regional Population Growth Caused By: 1. New immigrants and births to immigrants, 2. Births to native-born and 3. Migration from other U.S. regions”

I can guess which is going to get the most attention in the next 14 slides. Also, you really can’t include “births to immigrants” as a part of the immigrant category, by definition they are “native-born.” I mean, come on.

SLIDE 57-59: Well that didn’t take long: “IMMIGRATION is the sole cause of long-term population growth in the U.S.” (And don’t forget that we’ve included births to new immigrants in this category.)

SLIDE 60 – 68: The findings of a “Pulse Opinion Research commissioned by this study,” [emphasis mine] this should be good. Here are some highlights:

      • 39% would prefer to “slow down population growth” to “protect farmland and natural habitats in the Piedmont.”
      • 48% would prefer that population “Grow much more slowly” when asked about “a study of government data found that most reduction in Piedmont open spaces over the last decade was related to rapid population growth.”
      • An explicit immigration questions, I’ll include it in it’s entirety:
                  • “Q: Census data show that about 40% of population growth in the Piedmont—and 80% nationally—is from new immigrants and births to immigrants. What should government do?
                                    • 60% Reduce new immigration to slow down Piedmont population growth
                                    • 26% Keep new immigration and population growth at current rate
                                    • 5% Increase immigration and population growth
                                    • 9% Not sure”

SLIDE 69-70: Scary sprawl, just remember immigrants are to blame.


With this study focusing primarily on South and North Carolina, it seems likely that it will be released sometime early next year ahead of South Carolina’s presidential primary elections in late February. Let’s just hope no one listens.

Imagine 2050 Newsletter

  • translate

    English • Afrikaans • العربية • Беларуская • Български • Català • Česky • Cymraeg • Dansk • Deutsch • Eesti • Ελληνικά • Español • فارسی • Français • Gaeilge • Galego • हिन्दी • Hrvatski • Bahasa Indonesia • Íslenska • Italiano • עברית • Latviešu • Lietuvių • 한국어 • Magyar • Македонски • മലയാളം • Malti • Nederlands • 日本語 • Norsk (Bokmål) • Polski • Português • Română • Русский • Slovenčina • Slovenščina • Shqip • Srpski • Suomi • Svenska • Kiswahili • ไทย • Tagalog • Türkçe • Українська • Tiếng Việt • ייִדיש. • 中文 / 漢語