Skip to content
Link copied to clipboard

Head Strong: The unmentionable population boom

Newly updated census data confirm that the United States is in the midst of unprecedented population growth. Today, we are a nation of about 305 million, and in three decades we will reach the 400-million mark. Left undeterred, this will be the single greatest growth spurt in our history, as we expand by 135 million additional people by 2050.

A version of this column appeared in some editions Sunday.

Newly updated census data confirm that the United States is in the midst of unprecedented population growth. Today, we are a nation of about 305 million, and in three decades we will reach the 400-million mark.

Left undeterred, this will be the single greatest growth spurt in our history, as we expand by 135 million additional people by 2050.

I find it noteworthy that neither presidential candidate has addressed whether we're equipped to handle such rapid expansion - and I think I can explain the silence.

Try putting aside who's causing the growth, what they look like, and where they come from. Instead, imagine the population pop is being fueled by native-born American women.

Don't you think we'd be hearing concerns from environmentalists about the emissions onslaught brought on by more than 100 million more potential drivers? Wouldn't somebody express concern about our ability to educate so many new youngsters? Or treat them in emergency rooms? Or provide them with social services and police protection?

But what's really driving the population growth is significantly higher birth rates among immigrants and the continued influx of foreigners. That's where political correctness kicks in and politicians go mum, including the presidential candidates.

I tried to find either Sens. Barack Obama or John McCain addressing this information, but to no avail. A Google search yielded nothing. Neither did a search of their Web sites for press releases, speeches, or updates to their immigration statements.

Why? Because in the lexicon of American politics, population growth at home comes under the heading of "illegal immigration," which is now perceived to be the concern of right-wing talk-show hosts and xenophobes.

Hispanics, whose population is expected to triple by 2050 (from 46.7 million to 132.8 million), make up 15 percent of the U.S. population today. By 2050, that percentage will extend to almost one-third.

By 2042, minorities - everyone except "non-Hispanic, single-race whites" - will represent a majority of the U.S. population. That's eight years sooner than the Census Bureau had estimated just a few years ago. But to mention the growth is to be derided as a racist.

The Center for Immigration Studies is worried about the data. Steve Camarota, the director of research at CIS, told me he estimates that one-third of the total increase would be the result of illegal immigration.

"In just 42 years, the United States population will be 135 million people larger. Regardless of the ethnic makeup, that's enormous. That's a growth in just 42 years of about 44 percent. And that has enormous implications for the environment, quality of life, congestion, pollution, sprawl, traffic, preservation of open space."

Who best knows how to initiate a discussion that political correctness is stifling? Frank Luntz, the Republican wordsmith.

Luntz is the man credited with coining the expression death tax to replace the vague notion of an estate tax. He turned school vouchers into opportunity scholarships and converted offshore oil drilling into deep-sea energy exploration. He also recognized long ago that the fight over our porous borders needed a proper label. So the author of Words That Work: It's Not What You Say, It's What People Hear" cast aside illegal aliens and undocumented workers for more middle-of-the-road descriptor: illegal immigrants.

In the book, Luntz writes: "In the fall of 2005, I was asked to create a language dictionary to help Republicans channel the anger on the ground into a lexicon to help them pass tough enforcement legislation without provoking a Latino backlash."

He failed. His words often went unused without a legislative consensus upon which to apply them. I told him I thought it was time for another update.

He offered this advice: "You need to personalize and humanize it to the community, so that you don't ask the question generically. You ask the question: How do we add more people to New York, to Miami, to L.A., when they're already packed to the brink? Where's the housing come from? Where's the transportation come from? Be specific. Don't talk about infrastructure . . . infrastructure nobody gets, no one understands."

Luntz mentioned another word that works: consequences. Like it or not, an influx of 135 million new Americans in the next 42 years will have plenty of consequences. No matter where everyone comes from.