Polls continue to show a large majority of Americans favor calling a halt to all immigration -- legal and illegal. Also, in recent years, most environmentalists and conservationists have agreed that population pressure is the single most significant factor in the depletion of America's natural resources.
It's upsetting, therefore, that two of the nation's largest and most influential environmentalist organizations are helping to drive our rapid population growth. The Middle American News exposes the fact that huge sums of money raised by the Sierra Club and the League of Conservation Voters go to elect members of Congress who support mass immigration -- which experts say now accounts for well over half of America's population growth.
Research compiled by the Raleigh-based monthly reveals nearly every one of the incumbent congressional candidates endorsed by the Sierra Club and LCV in 1996 worked to defeat even modest reductions in the record numbers of immigrants flooding the United States annually.
Of the 48 congressional incumbents endorsed last year for re-election by the Sierra Club, 41 voted against either House legislation to reduce immigration by 20 percent, or Senate legislation to reduce immigration by 10 percent. Most of the 66 congressional incumbents the LCV endorsed last year also supported increased population growth. Only 10 LCV-endorsed incumbents voted in favor of reduced immigration.
Ironically, in a resolution posted on the Sierra Club's web site, there's a warning of the big environmental threat posed by uncontrolled immigration:
"The population explosion has severely disturbed the ecological relationships between human beings and the environment. It has caused an increasing scarcity of wilderness and wildlife and has impaired the beauty of whole regions, as well as reducing the standards and quality of living."
We caution anyone -- especially members -- who support the Sierra Club or LCV resolutions on overpopulation. The groups' heavy political endorsements of candidates favoring mass immigration totally contradict the long-held positions of the groups' general membership and contributors!