Baby steps.

The focus of the discussion of US national environmental efforts on population growth issues is on carrying capacity, the impact of the antiabortion movement, the insensitivity of some population control advocated to people of color, and congressional and presidential actions. Efforts are being made to surmount the mistrust that has characterized efforts to deal with population issues. The World Wildlife Fund, the Sierra Club, and the National Audubon Society recognize the need for population stabilization, albeit with meager budgets. Carrying capacity is the number of people the earth can sustain without rapidly depleting non-renewable resources or degrading resources necessary to sustain life. In 1970, Earth Day called for stabilization of the global population, but most celebrations of Earth Day in 1990 did not recognize this. Sensitive issues are involved, and the abortion controversy has muffled open forums on population growth. Lobbyists were successful in having the US withdraw funding for international family planning (FP) programs that had abortion components. Then Reagan eliminated all funding to the UN Fund for Population Activities, because of China's FP policies. The results for women have been disastrous. Zero Population Growth has been conducting information meetings for environmental groups. The National wildlife Federation has a new program linking population and environmental issues but will not deal with the issue of abortion. A Philadelphia editorial recommended implanted contraceptives for welfare mothers, which raised fears of the reemergence of the eugenic movement which sought involuntary sterilization or population control for the poor. Another effort was to protect the US from immigration as a way of curbing population growth. Meaningful change means education women, changing unfavorable survival conditions, and heeding the reasons women have children. Japan's FP Association criticizes population control efforts undertaken for economic and political benefit without attention being paid to people's lives. An informal coalition is supporting a large FP grant to the USAID. Senate leadership is more open for FP issues, and a bill has been proposed to increase international FP funds.