Zero Population
Growthof Greater Boston
Zero Population
Growth
| Volume 7, Number 6 | November/December 1997 |
The United States has grown to the third most populated country in the world, and continues to increase by nearly 3 million people each year. Combined with our high national levels of consumption, population growth in the United States exerts an extremely high toll on the national and global environment. Unfortunately, the U.S. still has not adopted an official policy to stabilize the U.S. population, despite efforts begun in 1970. The U.S. Sustainable Population Policy Project (USS3P), is a proposed project to develop and implement a coherent and fair U.S. population policy. At the November meeting of ZPG/Boston, the chapter will be asked to vote on whether or not to become a co-sponsor of this important initiative.
The USS3P aims to produce specific population policy goals, incorporating recent data and building upon the recommendations of previous national and international commissions and conferences. The project will seek to incorporate the views of a broad range of individuals and organizations, including environmentalists, civic groups, religious leaders, educators, minorities, social justice groups, corporations, and the media. The proposed three-year interdisciplinary project will combine national polling, focus groups, a working conference of experts, a national population policy conference, and a variety of follow-up activities and publications. The Executive Committee for the project includes Sonny Fox, Marilyn Hempel, Dr. Doug LaFollete, Dr. Daniel Maguire, Fred Meyerson, Dr. David Pimentel, Beth Curry Thomas, and Carole Wilmoth. The project Advisory Committee includes: Edward O. Wilson, Albert A. Bartlett, Senator Gaylord Nelson, Herman E. Daly, Stephen Mumford, Paul Hawken, Congressman Tom Sawyer, and Charles Westoff.
Co-sponsoring organizations will be involved throughout the project. Co-sponsorship does not imply agreement with the positions of other co-sponsors, but rather indicates a willingness to participate in an open, democratic dialog on national population issues. If ZPG/Boston votes to co-sponsor the project, we will join a long list of groups from around the country, including:
If you have questions , contact Annie Faulkner at (617) 648-0432
A new website has been initiated by Roy Beck which makes it very easy to send free faxes to Congress and let them know how you feel about various immigration issues.
When you call up the website there are a couple of choices: first time users information, sending free faxes and a list of questions for which you may want answers. If you want to register, you hit the free fax icon and you will be asked to fill in the blanks for your name, address, etc. You will need a complete zip code so look up your last junk mail if you do not know the extra four digits! After you have registered an ID and a password, be sure to print out that page so you can re-enter later.
When you hit the free fax screen icon after registering, it will list the headlines of the faxes needed to be sent and to whom or which Congressional committee. Hit one of those listings and a printout will appear of the letter that will be sent in your name. After reading through the message, you can either hit the icon for “send” or hit the icon for “I want additional information before sending”. In the near future you will be able to add a personal touch to your chosen message before sending which hopefully will draw more attention to it upon arrival in Washington.
Also, the home page of the website tells you how you can register other people on your computer if you have friends that want you to do it for them or to send messages in their name. Technical questions can be answered by the icons offered on the web page.
These faxes are not going through your computer. Rather you are sending an order to the website computer to fax your chosen message.
Fax Center Website: www.numbersusa.com
Questions for Roy Beck: roy@NumbersUSA.com
Questions regarding the Fax Center: info@NumbersUSA.com
What causes U.S. population growth? How serious is the effect of immigration?
This article is designed to explore the effects of immigration in the context of several factors which can lead to U.S. population growth. The reason for this discussion is obvious: stabilization of the United States population is one of our major goals and immigration is a controversial component of our growth. In order to formulate an intelligent solution, we must have a thorough understanding of the factors contributing to growth. In addition, I feel strongly that it is foolish to treat immigration as an independent issue, for when we address population it clearly is not. In this article, I try to objectively portray the true causes of U.S. population growth. This will set the table for a more philosophical opinion piece in the January newsletter focusing on what options we have for addressing this problem.
At the most basic level, only two factors determine the future of our population: natural increase due to an excess of births over deaths, and net immigration. Presently, ZPG facts show that our population is increasing in the following manner:
Demographic trends are based on relative expansions and contractions of the population due to changes in the percentages of people in the childbearing years versus those outside this range. These are basically cyclical events such as the recent “echo boom” where much of the population (the children of the baby-boomers) entered this childbearing period and gave our population a sudden boost. While these trends may alter population growth in the short term, in taking a long term view these events will tend to even out and therefore should be de-emphasized.
The effect of death rates on our population is not as clear. Continually growing life expectancies due to decreasing death rates will lead to increases in population. This effect has been most striking in the third world where declining death rates without corresponding reductions in birth rates have fueled the population explosion. However, much of this third world advance has come from reduction in infant mortality. In contrast, the U.S. infant mortality rate is so low (<1% ) that it is essentially at a minimum value. For decreasing death rates to contribute to sustained population growth, it would require a constant and steady lengthening of our life span into old age. While we expect to continue to increase our life span, I would suggest that the most likely scenario will be a gradual slowing of our advances, with the effect on our population becoming less and less significant. The eventual reality may depend on human ethics as much as on technology, as we have already begun to debate our ability and desire to extend life in certain instances.
Birth rate is the most obvious component of natural increase. Lower birth rates bring fewer children per family and help make strides toward population stabilization. Simple birth rate, however, is a poor indicator of future population trends because it uses data from only one year. This single snapshot of growth can be skewed if a large proportion of the population is in child-bearing years (due to the peak of a demographic cycle). If we wish to examine the effect of future births THROUGHOUT the current generation, fertility rate is a better measure. Fertility rate estimates the number of children a female infant would have in her lifetime if she followed the current age-specific childbearing trends throughout her life.
The magic level for fertility rate, also called the REPLACEMENT fertility rate, in the U.S. is 2.1. This is the level at which, if kept constant for a lifetime, the present population would exactly replace itself. (NOTE: this level is higher than 2.0 primarily because some women will not survive to childbearing years). The fertility rate in the United States has been below this level since 1972, bottoming out between 1.7 and 1.8 from 1975 to 1986. In the 1990's, the level has risen back above 2.0, but still below the replacement level of 2.1 (for reference, the total fertility rate in Europe, where some populations are shrinking, is generally between 1.3 and 1.7). However, the U.S. population continues to grow due to immigration, demographic cycles, and extension of life span. In general, fertility rate will be the key factor in determining WHETHER we reach ZPG, but the combination of all factors determines WHEN and at WHAT LEVEL we stop growing. Immigration is notable for being the one factor that can be quickly and predictably changed to alter the expected time and population at which we obtain ZPG.
Of course, there are still more complicated issues in examining the relative balance between immigration and natural increase. For example, immigration and fertility rate are not always separate issues. By factoring in higher fertility rates for recent immigrants, more significant effects of immigration can be quoted. While these statistics can be manipulated and argued ad nauseam, the bottom line is that immigration now accounts for approximately half of our population growth, and, barring significant changes in immigration policy, fertility rates, and death rates, this relative effect will grow steadily for the foreseeable future. (Webmaster's note: for a graphic demonstration of this effect, see the page America's Future at the NumbersUSA web site.)
In thinking about these issues, it is also important to know the level toward which we are heading if we don't address these issues. Recent mid-range estimates based on present levels of immigration, fertility, and death predict that by 2050 our population would grow by about 50% and still be slowly growing. These predictions, however, are highly variable and are very sensitive to the driving factors. Thus, no matter what our attitude toward immigration or fertility, we must realize that they will both be very significant factors in determining our eventual population.
What then, if anything, should we do about this problem? The above information does not suddenly make it easy to adopt a position on immigration. To do so requires each of us to personally reflect on the issues and to develop our own idea of what our optimal population should be and what our attitude is toward our relationship with the rest of the world. These more philosophical items will be covered in the January newsletter. If there is any message to take from this article it is the following: in the long-term, the major determinants of the U.S. population will likely be the balance between fertility rate and immigration, with death rate as a somewhat less likely contributor. We could reach ZPG more quickly and at a lower total level of population either by decreasing fertility rate or immigration, or both. In formulating a solution, I encourage everyone to think about both issues from each of two perspectives: that of the U.S. and that of the rest of the world.
This is the first of a two-part series on the immigration issue. Fertility rate statistics provided by Population Reference Bureau, other information from ZPG FAQ.
Massachusetts is currently one of several states pioneering legislation (SB 717) to require that medical insurance cover prescriptive contraceptive services. The Boston Chapter, led by Jeff Herman, will keep our membership updated on this bill's progress and provide you with the information you need to support this bill. We will be acting with the help of the Coalition for Choice, a group of organizations including the ACLU, League of Women Voters, Planned Parenthood, and the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice, to advance this bill.
The bill is currently in the Senate Ways and Means Committee awaiting release for a floor vote in the Senate. Please be alert to chapter efforts (via phone or email) to mass mobilize your support to push for passage of this bill. This could occur before the legislature breaks later this month, or when it reconvenes in January. In the meantime you can support the bill by sending letters to your legislators, Acting Governor Cellucci, or the Ways and Means Committee (especially Chair Stanley Rosenberg). See ACTION ALERT ahead.
In Massachusetts, many insurance companies ignore one of women's most pressing health care needs by refusing to provide coverage for contraceptives. This arbitrary policy forces women and their families to pay out-of-pocket for contraceptives or risk unintended pregnancy. At a time when there are approximately 93,000 unintended pregnancies in Massachusetts each year, this is an outrage!
Recent studies show that most insurance plans cover maternity care, abortion and sterilization. However, coverage is less consistent when it comes to routine gynecological care and contraception. In fact, only 15% of all health insurance plans currently include coverage for all five FDA-approved prescription contraceptive methods and only half cover any method at all.
Insurers in Massachusetts argue that including prescription contraceptives in health care plans will increase their costs. The facts, however, say otherwise. Contraceptive coverage is extremely cost-effective. For example, the five-year cost to insurers for a woman using no method of contraception comes to $14,663, whereas the cost of providing oral contraceptives over that same period is only $1,784 -- a savings of $12,879. Furthermore, estimates conclude that if insurers were to include coverage for contraceptive services in their plans, the annual cost increases would be minimal -- at most $16 per enrollee.
Nearly 60 percent of all pregnancies in the United States are unintended (either unwanted or mistimed). 40 percent of all births every year are the result of unintended pregnancies, and fully ten percent of births are unwanted.
About 85 percent of health insurance plans in the United States provide coverage for abortions and sterilizations, but only 15 percent of them cover all of the reversible methods of contraception (the Pill, Norplant, IUD's, diaphragms, and Depo-Provera - a shot). Only about half cover any of these methods.
Savings from public funding are equally dramatic. For every dollar of public money spent on family planning, $4.40 in future health and welfare costs are saved.
Women spend 68 percent more in out-of-pocket costs for health care than men. Reproductive health care services account for much of this discrepancy. Since all of the prescription methods of contraception are used by women, women are forced to use their disposable income to pay for family planning services.
Write or call Acting Governor Cellucci and ask him to sign SB 717 into law. The more input he receives in support of the bill, the better our chances are of gaining his support.
Acting Governor Paul Cellucci, State House, Room 360, Boston, MA 02133
Senator (full name), Massachusetts State Senate, Boston, MA 02133
The proposal would establish a national commission to analyze and debate the question: "What is the US optimum population?". After a 3 to 5 year information gathering period, the commission would summarize the input. It would then design a package of non-coercive educational, legislative, and public policy initiatives to place the USA on the path, during a long transitional time of 100 to 125 years, to achieving an optimum, sustainable population.
Individuals and organizations may sign the Proposal.
1) If you have a highlighted warning sticker on your newsletter, you are in danger of being dropped from our chapter newsletter mailing list. The sticker indicates that it has been nearly 2 years since we have heard from you. If you do not contact us by the January mailing, you will no longer receive the newsletter. If our records are incorrect, we apologize; please let us know!
2) If at any time you wish to receive the newsletter by e-mail or simply read it at our website, please contact me to let me know.
If either of these apply to you, please contact: Howie Breinan by phone at (617) 225-8905 OR by e-mail at: breinan@alumni.stanford.edu
We will meet at the home of Barbara Clapp, 100 Lexington Street in Belmont.
From Route 95/128: take either Exit 28A, which says Trapelo Road/Belmont, or Exit 28, which says Trapelo Road/Lincoln. Which exit you take depends on whether you are traveling north or south. Go east towards Belmont.
Immediately you will see an intersection with a light. From this point travel straight ahead on Trapelo Road for 3 and 1/2 miles (Do not turn right onto Lexington Street to Waltham Center) at which point you will pass a park and Andros Diner on your RIGHT. Take next RIGHT passing AA Rental and Mobil gas station. Pass through light and in two blocks see large brick building on LEFT. Park in lower lot in a guest spot or on the street. Enter lobby from parking lot.
From Route 2: going in either direction, take Exit 59 and go South on Pleasant Street (Rt. 60). After about 2 miles, Pleasant Street merges into Trapelo Road by the Star Market. Take a sharp left (Getty station on left) and then an immediate right onto Lexington Street passing AA Rental and Mobil gas station. Go through light and in two blocks will see a large brick building on LEFT. Park in lower lot in a guest spot or on the street. Enter the lobby from the parking lot.
Buzz Function Room. If you have questions, call Barbara at (617) 484-7986. If you need or can give a ride, call Mary Van Vleck at (781) 259-9828.
Meeting will begin on time at 7:30 pm!
Please see the meeting schedule for general information and other meeting dates.
November 17 -- John Cleland, from the Center for Population Studies at the University of London, will speak on “The Demographer’s Perspective on the Next Century.” At 4:00 p.m. at the Whitney Humanities Center (corner of Church & Wall Streets), Yale University, New Haven, CT
November 21-22 -- The conference on “Population Consumption and Sustainability: Infinite Growth in a Finite World?” scheduled to be held at the University of Minnesota, has been canceled.
December 12 -- Samuel Preston from the University of Pennsylvania and Director of the Population Studies Center, will be speaking on “African American Mortality.” At 4:00 p.m. at the Whitney Humanities Center (corner of Church and Wall Streets), Yale University, New Haven, CT
Please contact Howie Breinan if you know of any population-related events upcoming.
National ZPG wants a representative in each district to work with legislators, to lobby the ZPG message and keep the national office updated. Interested members should contact Andrew Brand about the District Activist Network by calling ZPG National: 1-800-POP-1956. (See September/October newsletter, front page)
The new business included discussion of the Contraceptive Coverage Bill which is being introduced in the state legislature so that health insurance would cover the costs of contraceptives. MA is the second state, after CA, to propose this type of legislation. (see page 3)
Jeff Herman reported on the book introduced at the last meeting, The Life and Death of NSSM 200: How the Destruction of Political Will Doomed a U.S. Population Policy, by Stephen D. Mumford. This study, (the National Security Study Memorandum 200), done in 1974, focused on the issues that will influence the future of the planet, including population growth and our pattern of consumption. Although overpopulation is well recognized as a prime factor in stabilizing our society (by such prominent politicians as Nixon, Warren Christopher, even Clinton), the study was quietly and firmly silenced and allowed to die. Even now, overpopulation is seen as an urgent problem by the highest levels of our government and yet is still ignored. This points out the dramatic need to create public pressure to address population issues. If our government does not hear from us, they will continue to do nothing!
For more information, Jeff recommended a book published by the Population Reference Bureau, Global Population: the Facts and the Future. This is available for $7.50 through the Population Reference Bureau, 1875 Connecticut Avenue NW, Suite 520. Washington, DC 20009 or (202) 483-1100.
More information: www.pbs.org
Order a video cassette: 1-800-937-5387
