To Save America, Have Lots of Children

by Paul Batura | December 10, 2025 | Culture

White House Chief of Staff for Policy Stephen Miller was on Will Cain’s FOX News television show on Tuesday and made a rather startling statement.

“What they don’t teach you in school is that from 1920 to 1970, there was negative migration [in America],” Miller told Cain. “There was a half century of negative migration. The foreign-born population declined by 40 percent for half a century … [Yet] during that same time period, the U.S. population doubled.”

How was that possible?

American families were having lots of children.

“That was the cauldron in which a unified shared national identity was formed,” Miller continued. “They went through a depression together, they went through world war together, they landed on the moon together. This great period in American history happened at a time when there was negative migration.”

The debate remains red-hot these days over illegal immigration and even, to some degree, over legal immigration, too. But students of history recognize that tension over those immigrating to the United States is not a new phenomenon.

Just over one-hundred years ago, the number of newly arriving immigrants was skyrocketing and putting pressure on all the country’s services. The Immigration Act of 1924, also known as the “Johnson-Reed Act,” was designed to address the huge influx of individuals and limit how many and from what parts of the world they would be allowed to come from.

Months after the legislation was signed into law, Major Henry H. Curran, who was serving as Commissioner of Immigration at Ellis Island, was quoted in a New York Times editorial:

“We are getting half as many as we did under the old law and that is a good thing for all concerned,” he said. “It is good for the country because we can assimilate them better. Therefore, it is good for the immigrant. He receives more attention than he could otherwise get at the stations and because he is one of a lesser number his opportunities are correspondingly better.”

He then added:

With the quantity cut in half we are getting immigrants of a quality twice as good as under the old law. That, of course, is for the best interests of the country. 

Those arriving were required to present a certificate of good character from their home government. Individuals were also required to present birth certificates and a certificate of health. A literacy test was required.

The legislation had its intended effect. By 1940, the number of legal immigrants entering the United States had dropped by over 90%. And yet, as Miller indicated, the U.S. population nearly doubled from 106 million in 1920 to 203 million people by 1970.

That’s because birthrates in America steadily climbed from a low of 2.06 children per woman in 1940 to 3.58 in 1960. Today, the fertility rate is hovering around 1.6 children per woman, well below the replacement rate.

The United States is not alone. With rapidly declining birthrates across the industrialized world, the only countries growing rely heavily on immigration to keep their nation afloat.

Demagoguery over well-meaning efforts to protect America’s borders and safely and wisely welcome individuals to America serves nobody but raw and radical interests that seem determined to undermine our nation’s ideals. It’s true the United States is a land of immigrants. But it’s thrived because it’s also historically been a nation of law and order.

Much like in the 1920s, America today faces an existential threat with a declining birth rate and an escalating national debt that compromises and threatens its ability to provide crucial social services to those who are here and unable, at least in the short-term, to support themselves. The country found its way through the crisis in the first half of the last century by reforming immigration laws, but also by marrying and having lots of kids. Expanding the blessings of family was the best way forward a hundred years ago – and it still remains the best way out of the mire right now.