NPG Responds to President’s State of the Union Address

NPG Responds to President’s State of the Union Address

Analysis finds the speech ignored many facts about U.S. population growth, but included some positive policy suggestions.

View this release on PRWeb

Click here for a downloadable, printable PDF version

Alexandria, VA (January 14, 2016) – After President Obama’s January 12th State of the Union address, Negative Population Growth (NPG) began its review of the policy goals the President outlined for his final year in office. NPG President Donald Mann responded: “Not surprisingly, America’s mass immigration numbers were once again portrayed as a holy grail for economic growth. However, NPG’s latest Forum paper highlights the real costs of such immigration-driven population growth, showing that a number of the President’s recent programs are simply setbacks on the road to a sustainable future.”

Released on January 12th, the new NPG Forum paper Immigration Drives U.S. Population Growth counters the President’s recent pushes to further expand America’s immigration numbers. Mann explains: “The President foresaw rich economic returns in his controversial DACA and DAPA programs, which would grant permanent legal status and ultimately green cards to some 11 million unlawful residents, while doubling the annual intake of new legal immigrants.” However, Mann warns: “There was absolutely no expression of concern during his final State of the Union address over the recent surge of imported population growth from our southern border, nor of the subsequent consequences it has created. Unexplained here is how vast admission of disadvantaged populations will increase per capita incomes, create more full-time and high-quality jobs, or improve the quality of life for average American citizens.”

Mann continued: “On the positive side, the President suggested some policy changes that NPG can certainly applaud. The President stated that he would ‘welcome a serious discussion about… expanding tax cuts for low-income workers without children.’ For decades, NPG has advocated a shift in America’s tax system to help our nation slow, halt, and eventually reverse its population growth. We propose replacing the existing federal income tax deduction for dependent children with a tax credit for all parents with 2 or fewer children, and an annual cash grant for low-income workers with no more than 2 dependents. By establishing a financial benefit for smaller family sizes, we simultaneously work to address poverty and establish a smaller U.S. population – which will greatly aid our environment, economy, and quality of life.

Explaining how population growth is at the root of many of America’s greatest problems, Mann suggested some of the issues that should be addressed in future States of the Union: “I’d like to see discussion of affordable housing, drought and water shortages, and the loss of open space and farmland. What is needed is a State of the Union message devoted to rising population and environment ills. Whoever our next President is, the next State of the Union should be a platform to create a national population commission – with the goal of setting an official national policy of population limits. If researchers are correct in their projections for U.S. population growth and resource depletion, the resulting crowding and environmental decay may soon make such a modern-day paradigm shift seem more necessary – and appealing – to the American public and policymakers.”


There is no remedy that can possibly avert disastrous Climate Change and Global Warming unless we first address the problem of world population size and growth, and its impact on the size of the greenhouse gas emissions that cause global warming.That means that we need to address the population size and growth of each nation, which together make up the world total.

World population, now over 7.3 billion, is predicted to rise to 9 billion by 2050, an increase of almost two billion, or 23%, in the short space of only 34 years from now.In the highly unlikely event that per capita greenhouse gas emissions could possibly be decreased by an equal percentage in such a short space of time (a blink of an eye) the total amount of worldwide emission would remain the same!

From this simple illustration it would appear that without drastically reducing the size of world population, there is no solution to the problem.None at all.So then why do our world leaders pretend that there is one?What is to be gained by pretending rather than by proposing a solution that would solve the problem – a reduction in the size of world population to not more than 1- 2 billion?
Like and Share:
Social media & sharing icons powered by UltimatelySocial