E-Verify Becomes Law in Florida!

It's amazing that E-Verify was passed in Florida against the massive resistance of the mostly Republican large business interests in Florida. Now the mass-immigration propagandists are already angrily attacking the bill.   

It's apparently a very moderate E-Verify: From what I've read, it only applies to businesses with more than 25 employees, and current unauthorized immigrants are grandfathered in. I personally think it should apply to all employers - by now all employers have a laptop and/or cell phone and can check on the legality of any employee in a few minutes. And employees have the right to appeal if they want to. And I believe the employers should be punished, not the immigrants (they have enough problems).

Unfortunately, many Americans believe that all immigrants that want to come here should be allowed in unless they are terrorists or mass murderers, and they view laws constraining immigration as equivalent to the Jim Crow laws. I can assure you, if the people that believe in quasi-open borders take long-term power, the USA will have well over a billion people by 2100. See the government's own projections: https://www2.census.gov/programs-surveys/popproj/tables/2000/2000-national-summary-tables/np-t1.pdf

Remember, no environmental problem in the USA is improved by massively increasing the American population, and immigration is now the primary driver of population growth in the USA.   

The European Left is Starting to Turn Against Open Borders

More members of the European left-wing are starting to turn against open borders. This excellent article from The Nation discusses the changes taking place in the European left. Unfortunately the author, David Adler, is obviously another neoliberal supporter of open borders and so-called free trade, and as usual writes in a tone that is insulting of people that believe in immigration moderation, but nevertheless he wrote an excellent article. It would be nice if we could have a rational discussion on immigration without the continual slinging of insults from the open borders side. Here is the article: Meet Europe's Left Nationalists.

It's also interesting to note that some Greens on the European left are against open borders and support immigration moderation. One of the most notable articles is from Colin Hines in the United Kingdom: Progressive Protectionism - the Green Case for Controlling our Borders.

Meanwhile in the USA I continue my battle against left-wing supporters of open borders: Here is a link to the email letter that I wrote to New York Magazine in response to its recent article supporting open borders written by Eric Levitz: Click Here.

I remind my fellow lefties that throughout the democracies of the world, most citizens support moderate immigration, not open borders. This is shown by the recent survey by PEW: Many worldwide oppose more migration - both into and out of their countries. I also remind my opponents that they are clearly on the losing side of history, so why don't we all work together for reasonable and moderate immigration policies for the Western Democracies to help stop the increase of right-wing populist movements and work together on a worldwide plan to help the more desperate countries of the world so that their citizens won't feel the need to migrate to our countries.
_____________

Editor's Update 1/24/2019: This article by David Goodhart, Why the left is wrong about immigration, written nearly six years ago, is even more relevant today and explains why the left should be against open borders. 

Editor's Update 10/20/2021: This article by Joseph Chamie, Mind the Gap: Public and Government Views on Migration Diverge (pdf), written over 10 years ago, explains why it's critical for mainstream political parties which tend to favor larger immigration, to take into account majority public views which tend to favor immigration moderation, in order to avoid disastrous political outcomes. He sure hit that nail on the head!

A Warning to National Democratic Politicians: Don't Plan to Increase Mass Immigration! ......See the Pew Research Center Survey Showing that a Large Majority of Americans Don't Support Increasing Immigration Levels.

Similar to all other polls on the subject, a recent Pew Research Center survey shows that the majority of Americans don't support increasing the level of mass immigration into the United States. Click HERE to see the survey.  

Even the majority of Democrats in the USA don't support increasing immigration levels, as shown in a previous blogpost in this blog. Click HERE to see the blogpost. 

If the elite of the Democratic Party continue to support increasing mass immigration, past its already high level of around 1 million per year, they will be helping to possibly push another right-winger into the presidency after Trump, and in the meantime may unwittingly be helping Trump to be re-elected. Fellow Democrats, if you try to double, triple or quadruple legal mass immigration limits in the next comprehensive immigration bill, you will be in trouble in future elections as the voters learn what you've done. 

In fact, if the American people knew that at our 2017 growth rate we're heading for over 1/2 billion people by 2100, a majority of Americans would demand a decrease in immigration because immigration is now the main driver of population growth in the United States.  

We can have a comprehensive immigration bill that doesn't increase mass immigration levels, but does solve the DACA issue and provides a pathway to citizenship for the people that are well-settled into the USA, while also instituting a mandatory, universal national E-Verify system to eliminate the unauthorized worker problem. That's the only type of comprehensive immigration bill you can pass without massive retaliation from the American voters.

John Brainard
Democrats for Reasonable and Responsible Immigration (DRRI)

Hillary Clinton Finally Admits that Mass Immigration is a Threat to Modern Liberal Democracies

In the articles below, Hillary Clinton states that mass immigration is a threat to modern liberal democracies, especially in Europe. It's good to hear a left-of-center politician finally admit the obvious truth: Modern immigration only works smoothly when it is done in moderation, by accepting well-vetted migrants, refugees and asylum seekers in limited numbers, otherwise the destination countries feel overwhelmed and threatened by the large numbers of new arrivals and often turn to populist leaders. 

In the USA, the total number of yearly immigrants, refugees and asylum seekers should be well below our current levels of around one million people per year, not just for cultural and political reasons, but primarily for environmental reasons. The world already has enough materialistically voracious Americans and our population is heading towards over 1/2 billion people by the year 2100 if we continue at our 2017 growth rate, which is driven primarily by immigration.

Here is the original article:
Hillary Clinton: Europe must curb immigration to stop rightwing populists

And here is an additional article:
Hillary Clinton: Europe Needs to Toughen Immigration Laws to Stave Off Nationalism 

An Article Offering Some Good Short-term and Long-term Solutions Regarding Immigration and the Migrant Caravans

The article below by Sonia Nazario, an experienced immigration reporter, offers some reasonable solutions to some of our immigration problems. Unfortunately both the Democrats and the Trump Administration probably won't accept her plan. The Democrats, my party, won't like some of her ideas because they involve real enforcement measures. The Trump Administration won't like some of her ideas because they're somewhat humane. 

There are other solutions not mentioned in her article that are also needed such as a strictly enforced, mandatory, universal, national E-Verify system in any new "comprehensive" immigration bill, an end to extended family immigration (sometimes called "chain migration"), greatly decreasing the number of yearly normal immigrants which is usually an ecologically irrational number of around a million or more, and increasing our ridiculously small refugee limit of 30,000 per year. But those ideas can be discussed later. Here is her article:

"I'm a Child of Immigrants. And I Have a Plan to Fix Immigration"   

Hey Fellow Progressives - You can't Have Both Open Borders and a Progressive Welfare State in the USA

First, let's get it straight that nobody in this discussion supports separating kids from their parents. We're all against that. And yes we should let in many more refugees each year than the pitifully small amount that Trump is allowing in. This discussion is about whether or not we should limit the total number of people that we welcome into our country as permanent residents each year.

It's time that all American progressives realize that open borders doesn't work in a modern welfare state such as the USA.

A high minimum wage for everyone in the USA, universal health care, universal guaranteed housing, universal high quality education, etc. can't happen with open borders on a desperate planet - you'll break the national budget! With 328 million people in the USA and probably at least a billion people that want to move here immediately if they could, there is no way that our economy could absorb all those people in a reasonable, smooth and peaceful way. Only so many jobs paying at least $15.00/hour can exist at any one moment in the economy. And if we were having a recession or depression, that would make matters even worse. Not to mention the massive cultural shock from so many people coming in from very different cultures around the world and the effect this can have on politics and government - just note the right-wing shift in Europe resulting from the relatively small refugee influx there. And, as the Europeans quickly learned with their refugee situation over the last few years, the democratic welfare state can only absorb so many new immigrants/refugees per year economically.   

Just think of the catastrophic effect of the addition of hundreds of millions of immigrants on the American environment as they try to obtain the voraciously materialist lifestyle of the Americans that were already here before them. It's ecologically irrational to allow that to happen to the USA and the world in the 21st century. 

And another issue, if we had open borders, is that many of the people that would be desperate to move here would be unable to afford safe transportation and would come via human traffickers and many tens of thousands would die as is happening in the refugee migration to Europe (over 33,000 have died at sea crossing the Mediterraen from 2000 through 2017 according to this article by NPR).

Bernie Sanders knows all this - that's why he doesn't support open borders. That's why you've never heard him make a speech in favor of open borders, and in fact during his campaign he didn't say much about immigration in general. That's because as promoter of a progressive future government in the USA, he knows that if you have unlimited immigration, the system will collapse. If you don't believe me, just go back over his speeches - he spoke in favor of helping immigrants in general, but never in favor of open borders.

On the other hand, libertarians support open borders. If you support open borders, then maybe you should join the Libertarian Party and give up on being an American progressive. The libertarian arguments sound reasonable and moral at first, but once you analyze them you realize that they are not rational or practical for a modern progressive welfare state - of course, the libertarians don't believe in the modern progressive welfare state. To see some of the libertarian arguments for open borders see their open borders site here.

You might also enjoy this brief video of the famous economist Milton Friedman explaining why "free immigration" (open borders) is not acceptable in the modern welfare state.

Now, just because we don't have open borders, this doesn't mean that people aren't welcome to come to the USA - everyone is welcome to come as a tourist, a student, and a worker on short-term and long-term visas. And in a world of fair trade (not free trade) people everywhere will be welcome to do commerce with the U.S. and visit the U.S. as business people.

Only when we have something like "The United States of Earth" can we have truly open borders. It will work then because there will be universal welfare, healthcare & other benefits for everyone around the earth and business wealth will be distributed relatively equally around the world, so large masses of people will have no desire to permanently move from one side of the planet to the other to materially improve their lives. Some people will move for marriage purposes, job purposes. for fun and for many other reasons, but it won't be an unmanageable number of people that will feel forced to migrate to another part of the world to improve their lives. But for now the answer is for the wealthy countries to help people in the least developed countries via a 'Marshall Plan' - the way the U.S. helped Germany and Europe become prosperous after the destruction of World War II.

In summary, if you consider yourself to be an American progressive, it's not rational for you to be for open borders at this time in human history on Planet Earth.

How the National American Environmental Groups are Stabbing the American Environment in the Back

HERE'S HOW: All of the major U.S. environmental organizations refuse to address the issue of American overpopulation, which is driven by mass immigration. Overpopulation is the critical factor that has a negative affect on almost every environmental and resource scarcity problem in the USA. 

WHY THE ENVIRONMENTAL GROUPS REFUSE TO ADDRESS THE ISSUE: 1. Fear of appearing politically incorrect. 2. Fear of being called racist. 3. Fear of upsetting their foundation and corporate benefactors that generally support high immigration levels.

MESSAGE TO ALL MEMBERS OF NATIONAL AMERICAN ENVIRONMENTAL GROUPS: Demand that the leaders of your groups start dealing with the elephant in the room - the large yearly population increase in America that is propelled by mass immigration. You all know that no environmental problem in the USA is improved by increasing the population, so why are you supporting environmental groups that support immigration bills that double or triple U.S. immigration levels? Tell the leaders of your groups that if they really want to support massive increases of the U.S. population they should quit their jobs and go lead mass-immigration lobbying groups, and tell them that they're not real environmentalists, they're just glorified public relations people.

Below is a link to a blog post that I wrote a few years ago that further elaborates on the issue:
U.S. Environmental Leaders that Support the Senate's Mass Immigration Bill Should Resign or Be Fired.

Below is a link to an excellent Article by Roy Beck and Leon Kolankiewicz that explains why the Environmental Movement stopped supporting population stabilization: 
Forsaking Fundamentals - The Environmental Establishment Abandons U.S. Population Stabilization.

The Majority of Democrats Don't Favor Increasing Immigration, Contrary to What the Mainstream Media Wants you to Believe

Once again the latest poll confirms that a majority of Democrats do not want to increase immigration levels, contrary to what the generally pro-open-borders mainstream media wants you to believe. This is demonstrated by the latest Pew Poll on immigration. Click here to see Pew Poll. And, the poll confirms that a sizable majority of Americans in general do not want immigration levels increased. 

Interestingly, the Harvard-Harris Poll of January 2018 which asks questions a little differently shows that a large majority of Americans, including a large majority of Democrats, want immigration reduced from its current level. Click here to see Harvard-Harris Poll [PDF] - see page 68. You can see how this poll indicates that most Americans have no idea that the U.S. actually takes in approximately one million legal immigrants each year, the rough equivalent of taking in double the population of the California city of Sacramento each year. 

It's time for the majority of Democrats that don't believe in increasing immigration levels, to stand up to the loud minority of the Party that's pushing for open borders. It's time to show some backbone and tell them that we don't want a country with a population level by the year 2100 that's similar to that of the overpopulated countries of China and India. Now is the time to take a stand before it's too late.

Introduction

Hi. My name is John Brainard and I'm the editor of The EarthDirectory.Net Network and the writer of this blog. Due to the stress on the American environment from the 328 million people that are already here (see here for some examples), it's necessary to work to keep the population of the USA from ever going over half a billion people. This requires moderation of immigration because immigration is now the main driver of population growth in the country. Most people don't realize that at our current yearly level of population growth, the USA will have over one-half billion people by the year 2100. That's within the lifetimes of some of today's kids. Current polls show that a large majority of Americans do not want immigration levels increased, yet various business and immigration lobbies continually put tremendous pressure on the Congress to increase U.S. immigration levels. The American electorate needs to be educated on this situation and on what its options are regarding immigration. No environmental problem in American is improved by continuing to increase the population of the United States. 

This blog is the companion site to the website entitled Democrats for Reasonable and Responsible Immigration (DRRI)[now archived 5/22/2023]. Its purpose is to provide information regarding the topic of immigration reduction, information which is often not available to the public via the predominant media outlets in America.