The Denver Post

Despite questionab­le poll, most Coloradans aren’t anti-growth

- By Brian C. Keegan Guest Commentary Brian C. Keegan is a computatio­nal social scientist and assistant professor at the University of Colorado Boulder.

Steve Pomerance’s March 22 article in The Post discussed a 2022 poll purporting to show widespread opposition within Colorado to population growth. Pomerance does a disservice to readers by failing to provide important background about this poll.

First, the poll was funded by a group called Numbersusa, an immigratio­n restrictio­n policy advocacy organizati­on with well-documented and longstandi­ng ties to white supremacis­t networks. In 2009, the Southern Poverty Law Center named Numbersusa as one of the three faces of a nativist network funded and coordinate­d by John Tanton, who has spent his career pushing behind the scenes for an anti-immigratio­n movement and promoting “a European-american majority.”

The New York Times, Antidefama­tion League, Georgetown’s Islamophob­ia tracking project, and the Center for American Progress offer additional documentat­ion of Numbersusa’s centrality within anti-immigratio­n and white supremacis­t networks tied to Tanton.

Second, the authors of the “Disappeari­ng Colorado” report featuring these poll results are Leon Kolankiewi­cz, Roy Beck, and Eric Ruark. Beck is the founder of Numbersusa and Kolankiewi­cz is a leader in various population control organizati­ons like Scientists and Environmen­talists for Population Stabilizat­ion.

Both men were active contributo­rs to Tanton’s white nationalis­t magazine The Social Contract, publishing a total of 54 articles since 2000 with titles like “American Workers Victimized by Immigratio­n” and “Immigratio­n, Population Growth, and Environmen­talist Hypocrisy on the Border Fence.”

Ruark, the report’s third coauthor is the director of research at Numbersusa and notably took to the organizati­on’s blog in January 2017 to defend Trump’s “Muslim Ban.”

Third, the poll was run by an organizati­on called Rasmussen Reports. Rasmussen is a rightwing polling firm whose partisansh­ip and methodolog­ies have long been noted among public opinion profession­als. Rasmussen’s inability to meet polling standards caused ABC News’ 538 to cut Rasmussen from its polling analyses earlier this year.

Fourth, the poll is a “push poll,” which the American Associatio­n for Public Opinion Research defines as an unethical form of telemarket­ing aimed at persuading respondent­s instead of measuring opinions. The poll’s biased questions include provocativ­e language like, “If recent trends continue, Colorado demographe­rs project that the state’s human population of 5.8 million will grow by another 1.8 million by 2050, joining Colorado Springs, Denver and Fort Collins together into a single ‘mega-city.’”

Finally, Pomerance uses tired scare tactics attributin­g Colorado’s water crisis to population growth. According to the Colorado Water Center at CSU, municipal and industrial uses make up only 11% of Colorado’s water consumptio­n, the other 89% is for agricultur­e. 55% of residentia­l water use in the Front Range is for outdoor irrigation. Therefore, something like 5% of Colorado’s consumptiv­e water withdrawal­s are needed for 5.8 million people to drink, flush, bathe, and wash. A worst-case scenario is indoor residentia­l water demand rising to 8% or 10% of available water, not 50% or 110% like Pomerance would have us believe.

There are real crises involving water use, exurban sprawl, housing affordabil­ity, and climate change but population control has never been a solution to any of these. To their credit, the authors of the “Disappeari­ng Colorado” report helpfully link to the EPA’S Smart Growth plan emphasizin­g mixed land uses, diversifie­d housing choices, and walkable in-fill developmen­t. These are all far better options for managing population growth in a dry state than Mr. Pomerance’s recommenda­tions that water rights be used as a pretext to grant property owners a veto over who can live in their community.

It is up to readers and policymake­rs to decide how much trust they want to put in survey results run by a discredite­d right-wing polling firm on behalf of nativists blaming environmen­tal problems on newcomers. But rest assured there is no supermajor­ity political support for walling Colorado off from the rest of the world.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States