These lines, etched in bronze, embellish the Statue of Liberty and also articulate the sentiment of this great American emblem:
"Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
...
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"
Emma Lazarus's sonnet might need to be rewritten. Today, she might write:
"Give me your ambitious, brainy young.
I will shine the lamp of my colleges, universities and libraries on them.
Your masses yearning to learn shall learn,
And shall walk back through this golden door straight into your arms."
There are many reasons why graduates of American universities are leaving, especially if they came from overseas. One obvious one is that these graduates find better economic opportunities overseas today than they used to a decade ago. But the fact remains that they also find the American policies on highly skilled immigration irksome. Highly irksome.
Never before has a country invited the best brains from around the world, given them an education using her own money and then, pandering to the irrational sentiments of the angry and easily misguided, asked these brains to depart and invest their blossoming talents for the progress and betterment of interests and nations alien to herself.
The story of reverse brain drain in the top bracket of human talent plays out something like this:
International students come to America to study. They pay tuition, but also benefit greatly from American taxpayer money, grants and endowments.
Many colleges will tell you that tuition doesn't even fully cover the cost of the education they are providing to their students. International students who pay tuition variously benefit from vast amounts of research grants, corporate-sponsored programs and endowment-financed facilities and buildings. Many international students also get large amounts of financial aid and scholarships. Many, if not most, international students who come to the U.S. to obtain advanced degrees, such as PhDs, usually do so on scholarships or tuition waivers in lieu of teaching or research.
But after paying for them, American immigration laws make it tough for them to stay.
Limits on H1B visas, the tedium & delays of processing green cards and labor certifications for citizens of India and China, and other restrictions on timing and requirements of practical training clauses in student visas greatly restrict economic presence of these graduates in the United States on completion of their degrees.
Because it is tough for them to stay, the economic benefits of this labor pool accrue to other countries. Offices are opened abroad. Companies are started and funded abroad.
American companies want to hire these international students who turn into managers, scientists and engineers. These companies would have opened offices here, but since they can't hire them here, they go overseas.
From Microsoft on an announcement of opening a new center in 2007:
"The Microsoft Canada Development Centre... [in] Vancouver, Canada... will be home to software developers from around the world... [and] allows the company to recruit and retain highly skilled people affected by immigration issues in the U.S. ... [It] would create a tremendous opportunity for Canada.... while providing strong economic benefits to British Columbia and Canada."
Many entrepreneurs from among these managers, scientists and engineers educated at American universities are starting companies outside America. Visas aren't available for them to start companies here with local capital. Venture capitalists (with American pension money, American endowment money and the money of wealthy Americans) wanting to fund these entrepreneurs educated at American universities are funding companies outside America. Further, taxes and employment from all this economic activity related to these new companies are benefiting nations outside America.
Examples of upcoming companies that have benefited from this reverse migration of people and capital include SnapDeal, PubMatic, Makemytrip.com, A Thinking Ape, Praetorian Group, Campfire Labs and the like. This is in addition to the right-sourcing of jobs and talent by behemoths like Microsoft, Google, Amazon, eBay, Intel and the like.
You get the picture. America's universities educate the world's best minds, many times at a subsidized price. Then America sends these minds abroad to raise money from American VC funds to start companies abroad and employ foreigners.
This is not about comprehensive immigration reform. This is about a common sense and easy economic survival technique.
The issues here are not related to comprehensive immigration reform, which deals with highly-sensitive issues pertaining to 10-12 million people. Highly-skilled immigration reform only has to do with a few thousand graduates of reputed American schools every year -- it is something so removed from the issues of illegal immigration that conflating these two distinctive issues is like masking legitimate legislation in reams and reams of pork barrel measures.
Comprehensive immigration reform is impractical given the politics in Washington, DC. Highly-skilled immigration reform is basic common sense. These two have nothing to do with each other with the exception of political posturing needs. Academics, business leaders and politicians on both sides of the aisle generally agree with this but can't act:
"...engineering and technology companies started in the U.S. from 1995 to 2005....25.3% of these [have] at least one key foreign-born founder. Nationwide, these immigrant-founded companies produced $52 billion in sales and employed 450,000 workers in 2005." - Vivek Wadhwa's "America's New Immigrant Entrepreneurs" (Duke University, UC Berkeley 2007)
"Microsoft has found that for every H-1B hire we make, we add on average four additional employees to support them in various capacities." - Bill Gates (Congressional testimony, 2008)
"It makes no sense to educate the world's future inventors and entrepreneurs and then force them to leave when they are able to contribute to our economy." - Charles E. Schumer (D) & Lindsey Graham (R) (Washington Post, 2010)
Until America gets anywhere on this issue, the world will keep taking back its educated, upgraded and highly-skilled people educated and trained in America. Perhaps, like American universities do from alumni, America could also ask these countries and their American-educated citizens for endowment contributions? The solicitation letter will go something like this: "To India & China, with Love: America needs your help now, more than ever before, as we shooed away our job creating graduates."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-south-asia-13595196
http://www.law.yale.edu/news/13171.htm
Another aspect of the issue is that not only the immigration bureaucracy would like to send the talents back so that they won't "steal the jobs" domestically, but also the Corporate America has the incentive to hire US-trained brains in other parts of the world for less. Many grads who can't find a job, partially due to the disadvantage in the immigration status, end up working for a global company at a branch in their own countries.
I totally agree with the limitations on H1B entrepreneurs should be revoked for the sake of creating jobs. There is also a blurry line between job-stealing and job-creating talents. Job-creating is often the longer term effect of job-stealing, as successful managers or entrepreneurs who create jobs need to take a job somewhere from the start. It is important to balance the short-term and long-term consequences and make the best choice to make America more competitive.
-Hilary
www.freeenterprise.com
www.facebook.com/AmericanFreeEnterprise
I can't say that this is a conscious goal in the minds of the immigration policy makers when they set such difficult immigration laws, but, I wonder if making immigration policy difficult even for the most highly talented immigrants serves some purpose in the long run. While these immigrants are not able to directly, or immediately, contribute to America's economy in terms of jobs and business growth, highly educated immigrants who return to their home countries can be great ambassadors who will be friendly to American interests in their home countries. They would be available to lobby for policies in their home countries which are more friendly to American interests.
I'm sure there is some international relations bit that could be explored regarding this immigration policy.
But seriously, you are absolutely right. The only qualm I have is that this does NOT go far enough, this country needs comprehensive immigration reform. Not only do we have the 'reverse brain-drain' problem, where our taxes go to educate a world who eventually move more of our jobs overseas (and honestly, if you want to work in America and pay your taxes and contribute to our consumer economy I say bring it ON!) - but the proliferation of illegal immigration (the keyword is illegal) lessons the value of American labor. Why would I pay $8 an hour for someone to do something when I can pay someone else $5?
And for the people who like a little bigotry with their comments. Who is going to hire a maid who can't speak English when one who does costs the same?
I understand the frustration on the part of many Americans with respect to our education system's deterioration, but I hope more people can resist using foreigners and legal immigrants as scapegoats and direct their attention to parties who are more to blame. Immigration and education are multifaceted issues and this blog post is addressing one of many aspects. I don't doubt that corporations seek to hire cheaper labor in India, but we're talking about people who come here to study but can't apply what they've learned in the US and have to do so in other countries.
Our educational system needs to be reformed in many areas and both sides of the political aisle have good points. The high level of partisanship stifles us in doing what needs to be done to make our nation more competitive. That and other economic and social policies have led us to a path where there is a systemic problem. But, as difficult as it may be, let's not let those issues obscure the fact that we're training and developing people only to have them take what they've learned and help other countries without giving them the opportunity to apply those skills here in America.
Green Card stapled to his/her letter of admission.USA universities are THE BEST,world wide,for research and advaned training in science and engineering.More than half of PhD students in Engineering are from abroad- mostly from Asia.We are simply blithering fools to let these talented people get away after we train them.
should absorb all of THEIR bright,well trained students? This seems self- destructive,from their viewpoint.
On the other side of the coin, one of my past Chinese clients owns a large factory in China. She came to the US and tried to open a US sales branch, employing Americans. When she met her husband in Canada for the Winter Olympics, the US refused to let her back into the US. She has now moved her north America sale branch to Vancouver Canada and employs Canadians. While she can not enter the US, her products can because of NAFTA.
US migration laws are very counterproductive.
This story says our immigration system is turning away graduates but does little to dig deeper and determine which skills most frequented accepted and which are most frequently turned away. I suspect the vast majority of foreign students here are studying in our business schools and I suspect many of those turned away are business graduates that lack the ability and/or capital to be of much assistance to the American economy but could do wonders in their less developed home markets where they'd find more support and less competition.
I don't agree with expanding or lifting restrictions on the H-1B visa. This visa allows way too many average people with ordinary skills in to the US in HOPES that a handful of them are extraordinary. For jobs in the tech field, there are essentially three main tiers for employer-sponsored green cards. These tiers are known as EB-1, EB-2 and EB-3. These tiers are ranked by level of talent, as codified in the law:
* EB-1 is for "foreign nationals of "extraordinary ability" and for "outstanding professors"
* EB-2 is for those who are either of "exceptional ability" or possess an "advanced degree"
* EB-3 is for those with "bachelor's degrees"
The point is that "the best and the brightest," i.e. EB-1, have to wait only a few months. The MAJOR backlog is with the EB-3 category - those with only a bachelor's degree. If we truly want "the best and the brightest", visa beneficiary hopefuls who would only qualify for the EB-3 category should no longer take up the majority of visas. They should not be considered. In doing so, visas would be freed up to go to MORE people with advanced degrees who are truly exceptional or extraordinary, and who would hopefully apply for citizenship.
Of course now, it includes all those folks that will work at jobs too dirty or too hard for Americans, which has good and bad sides.
Please back that up with some sort of citation. Just because YOU say that these jobs are "too dirty or to hard for Americans" doesn't make it so.
"These people by and large offer more to our society than others who we currently pander to and let abuse our immigratioÂn system"
You seem to be arguing a completely different argument. Let's review the article quickly (all emphasis in the below quotes are mine):
"Never before has a country invited _THE_BEST_BRAINS_ from around the world..."
"The story of reverse brain drain in THE _TOP_BRACKET_OF_HUMAN_TALENT..."
"Many, if not most, international students who come to the U.S. _TO_OBTAIN_ADVANCED_DEGREES,_SUCH_AS-PHDS..."
"America's universities educate _THE_WORLD'S_BEST_MINDS..."
"_HIGHLY_SKILLED_ immigration reform is basic common sense"
The author makes it clear he's talking about the best of the best. But a small percentage of H-1B beneficiaries are of that caliber, as indicated by the author's own words,
"_HIGHLY_SKILLED_IMMIGRATION_REFORM_ONLY_HAS_TO_DO_WITH_A_FEW_THOUSAND_GRADUATES_OF_REPUTED_AMERICAN_SCHOOLS_EVERY_YEAR_"
The article talks about, "Limits on H1B visas..." and "...the tedium & delays of processing green cards...". My point was that the author's and industry's claim of wanting only "the best and brightest" belies their true objective of expanding the H-1B visa (which is cheap labor). There is very little delay in getting a green card for the truly exceptional foreign national.
Wadhwa, in case you don't know, was the founder of a company called Relativity Technologies. In an interview, he was quoted as saying, "I was one of the first [CEOs] to use H-1B visas to bring workers to the U.S.A. Why did I do that? Because it was cheaper." It looks like HuffPo doesn't allow including links in comments, so I can't post the link. Just Google, "The next wave of globalisation: Offshoring R&D to India and China". It's an article in CIO magazine written by Stephanie Overby.
Now to the content of this unique string. I feel, in my own capacity (however broad or limited that may be), that several responses to Dinkar's observations are largely tangential to his main point: US immigration bends towards protectionist policy by shooing away qualified foreigners. As to whatSundialsvc4 has said- yes, in theory this may be true, but what of it? In any case, professional indentured servitude is hardly a significant problem compared to some of the the deep set underlying social issues that the US was built upon. Most are positive, of course, I was first and will always be an American. But, that doesn't mean that immigration policies, especially toward Asians as opposed to those of European descent, is wholly one sided.
Leading economies cannot continue to dominate global commerce by relying on past success. Just look at England for instance. Or (shudder), France. India and China strongly encourage the basic science and engineering as a means for its inhabitants to break out of the cycle of continual poverty. Meanwhile, most Americans routinely fixate on the "Desparate Housewives of ... etc."
I am of Indian descent and what that means is that I sincerely appreciate that America is a meritocracy. But let us hope that we do not lose sight of what made this country great: immigrants.
Talent is everywhere - geo-poltical barriers make absolutely no sense. The issue in the US is that America's best and brightest have been bypassed because loopholes in US immigration policy the size of the Pacific Ocean allow segregated employment. As a result, today's US immigration laws allow employers to practice segregated employment and only hire foreign citizens.
Sadly, US citizens never even get a chance to compete for jobs in our own zip code because they are exclusively advertised in India - and these job boards intentionally hide jobs from US IP addresses. See for yourself, don't believe me check out thousand of USA jobs only advertised in India here www.brightfuturejobs.com
It makes zero difference if you are best and brightest -- the fact and the bottom line - you are the cheapest. And, in the game of corporate greed and global labor arbitrage, the lowest cost bidder wins.
Are you proud of your victory? You are, in part, accountable - your victory - you have successfully priced out millions of qualified American citizens who have paid our taxes and our dues. US citizens with children and a mortgage cannot afford to take McDonald's wages for high skill labor - but now that you've monopolized the market, we may have not choice.
Just sayin'
Sadly, I have to agree with that. Partly it is the school system, but a lot of it is simply an attitude problem with Americans. They have had it so easy for so long that far too many think it is a real imposition on them to excel.
Now, you bet that "the best brains, among the cheapest brains" DID do what "the best brains" always do: they found an opportunity and they exploited it to their fullest advantage. There is no national monopoly on human intellect or resourcefulness. More power to them.
But ... hidden not-too-far beneath the surface of this search is the very ulterior motive of bringing in large numbers of people whom, they knew, "would work for considerably less." People who would never become citizens; people who would be compelled to work for one company no matter what conditions they were subjected to. In other words, "student indentured servants." The conditions under which most of these people work are not pretty. I have seen plenty of sweatshop cube-farms in which the workers are identified by pictures. No one attempts to pronounce their names.
So, I do not believe that this was, in fact, "a world-wide search for the best and the brightest," even though "the best and the brightest" (among many others) obviously did avail themselves of it. That wasn't the reason why it was done. That WAS the reason why "applications for citizenship," or even applications for residency beyond the H-1B and L-1 Visa status, was never realistically made available to them.
Business found "serfs, and a pretext."
I would go even further than my last post. Students native to a state should have priority, then out of state, and the international. I would go even further - give international students priority based on which country are our "strongest" allies (I guess we ask the State Department for a ranking lol). Military brats like I once was should get in-state since we are forced to move every two years to God knows where.
I actually kind of like that idea, perhaps with extra points for education level.
With the expansion of outsourcing over the last 10-15 years, guess where the most experienced resources come from. Yes, India. Are they paid less, sure. Can't an American in the same "zip" code apply for the same job and be as productive. In my experience, the chances of that happening in a domain that requires such a high level of specificity, is near impossible.