NOT EVERYONE DESERVES THE RIGHT TO IMMIGRATE

When we fill out an I-485 application to adjust status for our clients, there are a number of questions that I have never, ever had to answer in the affirmative. And thank goodness. Have you ever engaged in political assassination? A hijacking?  Killed someone on account of their race or religion? And then there's the Nazi question. We know a number of them hid their pasts and made it in to the US. The late Simon Weisenthal achieved fame tracking them down. But after 62 years, are there any still alive in the US who have yet to be identified and deported? There are still a few and one apparently recently turned up in a retirement community in Arizona. He admitted to his role in atrocities and has been deported.

The Department of Justice has a unit called the Office of Special Investigations devoted to tracking down and deporting Nazi war criminals. In the next few years, there work tracking down Nazis will obviously come to a conclusion. But they are in the process of transitioning in their mission to track down perpetrators of more recent atrocities and are now investigating war criminals from places like Chile, Bosnia and Cambodia. We can all hope that one day, we'll no longer need an OSI because there will be no war criminals in the world. Until then, it is good to know that we have an OSI.   

Comments

[Legal Immi]

"I'm pretty sure that's where the H-1b fees went ;-) "

There you go , you found yet another reason to deport all the H1BS. :)

[Middle Ground]

You should have at least one fried twinky before you die ;-)Actually, it may result in your death.

I'm pretty sure that's where the H-1b fees went ;-) knowing this govt...

[Legal Immi]

"I did hear of a cooking school that got some of the money. "

Hope the same school did not invent Fried Coke http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fried_Coke

This is what Bill Maher had to say on HBO about fried coke

"Doesn’t anybody wonder why we live with all this illness? I’ll tell you why. At the L.A. County Fair last week, they were serving something called “Fried Coke.” Now, my first thought was, gosh, what a waste of a perfectly good “Eight Ball.” But, no, they actually pour the Coca-Cola syrup into a deep fryer.

Then put it in a cup and top it with sugar and whipped cream, and a cherry, because, you know, fruit is good for you.

Would it really be that much more unhealthy to get molested by one of the carnies?
"

"I really have no idea if anything productive has been done with the millions of dollars collected. "

Every time a person gets their H-1b visa, some guy from the gov sends out an email with a list of IT courses that have been prepaid for us.

Only kidding. Wouldn't that be nice.

I haven't known anyone who benefitted from the fees. I did hear of a cooking school that got some of the money. I hope they were using high-tech cooking equipment. Digital thermometers at least.

[Greg Siskind]

It is supposed to go to a grant fund for re-training initiatives. I really have no idea if anything productive has been done with the millions of dollars collected.

[Legal]

Greg,

You have any idea how the goverment uses this fee at all?

[Greg Siskind]

I was actually kidding.

[Middle Ground]

"Well let some more H-1Bs in and there will be plenty of $$$$."

Unfortunately Greg, the numbers just don't add up. Swap a $60 - $100k/yr profession for a $1500 course? If there was an H-1b worker for EVERY American worker the most each worker would get is $1500.

Keep the money - we want the jobs. I'll look under my couch for spare change and see what I can do about training.

I would rather see the fee dropped to $0 than to give some lobbyist political ammunition that they need.

[Greg Siskind]

Well let some more H-1Bs in and there will be plenty of $$$$.

[Middle Ground]

"How about using that $1500 fee charged on H-1B cases that is supposed to go to re-training you programmer types to help you compete."

Would be nice if that money didn't go to cooking schools.

Also, have you ever taken a course for $1500? Here is one I want to take: http://www.develop.com/us/training/course.aspx?id=376

Low low price of $2795. And that's just 4 days. Those H-1b fees don't seem so high now do they? I've taken 6 weeks of training during the last two years. You do the math. Then throw in a graduate degree. You don't want to know what that cost.

[Greg Siskind]

How about using that $1500 fee charged on H-1B cases that is supposed to go to re-training you programmer types to help you compete. Obviously, you're untrainable ;-)

[Greg Siskind]

I suggested 2% unemployment as a good place to start. But DOL already has something called Schedule A in the green card context where labor certification recruiting is waived based on a DOL finding of a long term shortage. So they can be the arbiter.

[Sid]

"Or we can both continue the political activism. I like my odds. Chances are nothing will change if the two groups don't find some middle ground."

Let me predict what will eventually happen. After the presidential elections(possibly in 2009), the H-1B cap will go up. Let me see if you and PG can stop that from happening. Outsourcing was an issue during the 2004 elections. It died as a political issue after that. The same thing will happen to the H-1B issue after the 2008 elections.

[Middle Ground]

"Why would you be against more specific, more exact data? "

I'm not against it. The problem is that we don't have both timely and specific data available.

Maybe we can tax the rich and hire more people to conduct employment timely and specific surveys ;-)

[Middle Ground]

And fyi, the three groups you defined seem like a good start. It at least seems to be based on some thoughtful approach instead of an arbitrary number.

Who gets to pick what constitutes a "severe shortage"?

;-)

[Greg Siskind]

MG - I think you missed my point. The component occupations are listed, but the unemployment is still an aggregate across a number of occupations. Why would you be against more specific, more exact data? This should be H-1B number neutral.

[Middle Ground]

"Roy really very broadly defines the field - software occupations."

Actually, it was very explicity defined:

"* Software Employment and Unemployment is a combination of Computer Scientists, Systems Analysts, Computer Programmers, Computer Software Engineers, and Database Administrators."

These occupations all typically require 4 year degrees and are closely related to software engineering.

[Greg Siskind]

»The best solution I have found so far when it comes to caps is this one: http://www.freedomcast.com/h1b/NIVSolution2006.pdf<<

Market-driven protectionism. That's not an oxymoron? There is something to be said for a proposal like this IF we are to accept caps on H-1Bs (I think the cap is a form of protectionism and have a philosophical problem with it, but let's get past that for the moment). Roy's cap is based on an assumption that 2% is the full employment rate. I've seen the figure 4% as the figure representing what economists generally consider full employment. Second, Roy really very broadly defines the field - software occupations. The problem with this, of course, is that there are many, many occupations within this field and the approach is going to be pretty inexact - many workers needing protection won't get it and other employers with a legitimate need will have a problem. Third, the caps can swing wildly from year to year under Roy's formula. I like the soft landing approach in the comprehensive bills where numbers to up and down gradually.

I would consider another approach, but one that has some similarities.

The program would have a couple of elements:

There would be three groups:

1. Open pool - set number of cases- maybe 50,000 or so - that are available as now without being tied to unemployment data but which would require a labor market test to prove the specific unavailability of US workers.

2. Unemployment allotment cases - for professions with unemployment between 2 and 4% - an allotment along the lines Roy mentions.

3. Severe shortage professions - for professions deemed to suffer severe long term shortages - examples would likely include teachers, MDs, etc. - no caps. Under 2% unemployment or special certification by DOL would qualify professionals in this group.

The numbers could be tweaked, but this would probably be more workable than the more rigid approach of Roy.

[Middle Ground]

"I don't know any body-shoppers or anyone who works for one. What am I supposed to do to please you? "

Did I ask you to do something to please me?

The ILW would better serve their clients if they pushed for removal of some of the more controversial aspects of the H-1b.

Or we can both continue the political activism. I like my odds. Chances are nothing will change if the two groups don't find some middle ground.

[Sid]

"They are cheap labor in the sense that they work for on average $13k less than American IT workers."

In that case, start using the term "cheaper" from now on.

[Sid]

Why are you asking us to stop the body-shops? It's the responsibility of DOL/USCIS. When there's a crime in your neighborhood do you report it to the cops or do you go around banging your neighbors' doors and demand that they go after the criminals? I don't know any body-shoppers or anyone who works for one. What am I supposed to do to please you?

"You keep calling H1bs cheap labor as if they are picking the fruit for $5 an hour. "

They are cheap labor in the sense that they work for on average $13k less than American IT workers.

Of course this isn't across the board. There are highly paid H-1b workers also. However, the majority are not in that category if you believe the LCA data.

I'm telling you - Greg - and anyone that will listen. Stop the body shops and most of the opposition to this progrem goes away. But they want their cake and to eat it too.

[Legal]

"The problem is that H-1b visa holders are used as a source of cheap labor"

You keep calling H1bs cheap labor as if they are picking the fruit for $5 an hour.

None of the H1B visa holders that I know and good at what they do have take home incomes of less than $5k after taxes ,In case of most of the working couples its not less that $10k a month.I dont think these levels of income are cheap by any measure.Come to bay area and see how many H1b couples own homes costing more than $700k. One more thing most of these people have amazing amounts of savings in bank accounts compared to average americans making same kind of money.

One can call cheap labor as louds as one wants but most of these people are not cheap labor. They may be "cheap" when it comes to spending money but not while making money.

A couple in my family have completed their masters in a NY university and work as pharmacists in Dallas TX and their take home money is close to $14k a month. Guess what, both of them are on H1B and both of them are less than 30 years old.

http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/Investing/Extra/6SecretsOfSuccessfulImmigrants.aspx

[Middle Ground]

"If I were in your place, I would really press the DOL/USCIS to improve their screening process for H-1Bs so that the body-shoppers and outsourcing companies cannot bring in candidates with inflated resumes."

It's not about inflated resumes - that trivializes what is going on. The problem is that H-1b visa holders are used as a source of cheap labor. The body shoppers bear most of the guilt - so obviously they top the list of what we want changed.

I don't believe outplacement firms or offshoring firms should be permitted to sponsor H-1b visa holders. I've said this before - if Greg and pals when after the offshoring firms and body shops, they would have much more political leverage and credibility.

But they will never do that.

[Sid]

MG, I don't think the situation is that bleak for American s/w engineers or for future CS grads. It would be really sad if the high-school kid from NJ who hacked the iPhone becomes an accountant or a lawyer based on all this negative publicity.

If I were in your place, I would really press the DOL/USCIS to improve their screening process for H-1Bs so that the body-shoppers and outsourcing companies cannot bring in candidates with inflated resumes.

[Middle Ground]

"Stop spreading the propaganda about s/w engineering being a poor career choice and the good students will flock back to CS. "

It is a bad career choice if trade policies continue. At this point in time, I wouldn't suggest CS for my kids. That may change, but currently the occupation is immature.

We are faced with body shops - that import cheap labor. We are faced with a rush to offshore (granted that is more tempered now). And our profession is open to anyone. We don't really have degree requirements, licensing, or a strong professional association.

I would encourage my children to pursue a more mature profession. Accounting, law, or healthcare. The only reason I would encourage college students to pursue this profession is if it is something they WANT to do. In short, don't do it for the money. The money may not last.

[Sid]

"Well, the good students won't pursue computer sciences if the occupation is not as lucrative as other professions. Flooding the occupation with cheap labor doesn't make it very attractive."

Stop spreading the propaganda about s/w engineering being a poor career choice and the good students will flock back to CS. Because of all the negative publicity, even the ones that would be really successful are doing another major in business or finance to be on the safe side.

[Middle Ground]

Yeah, I just realized that I misquoted you.

"No. I mean the dumb fresh college graduates. I was a TA from 2000 - 2002 - seen plenty of those. Also, the low end H-1B workers who've been brought in by body shoppers."

Well, the good students won't pursue computer sciences if the occupation is not as lucrative as other professions. Flooding the occupation with cheap labor doesn't make it very attractive.

A good consultant will easily make over $80k a year. But it takes time to become a good consultant. We need smart young people to not turn their nose towards software engineering.

[Sid]

I didn't say that you are an endangered species. You are saying that. I'm saying exactly the opposite. The fittest ones will have no issues in thriving (and they are) even with competition from H-1Bs and outsourcing.

"You mean new college graduates. Also, the H-1b workers who stick around for over 3 years eventually become experienced and start competing against workers higher up the ladder."

No. I mean the dumb fresh college graduates. I was a TA from 2000 - 2002 - seen plenty of those. Also, the low end H-1B workers who've been brought in by body shoppers.

[Middle Ground]

"If we are an "endagered species" as you say, why on earth should there be even a single software engineer admitted on an H-1b visa?"

Oh, you didn't say that. I accidentally misquoted you.

I don't believe that software engineers are endangered or going extinct. I believe that the H-1b at very high levels harms the occupation. The best solution I have found so far when it comes to caps is this one: http://www.freedomcast.com/h1b/NIVSolution2006.pdf

[Middle Ground]

"It is the lower rung that is really in competition with the H-1B's."

You mean new college graduates. Also, the H-1b workers who stick around for over 3 years eventually become experienced and start competing against workers higher up the ladder.

"American s/w engineers are an endangered species but they are really trying to protect the low end workers. The high end workers don't need any protection."

How can we be an "endagered species" but not need protections? It would be dumb if we didn't protect the next generation of software engineers.

If we are an "endagered species" as you say, why on earth should there be even a single software engineer admitted on an H-1b visa?

[Sid]

What I don't understand is all this brouhaha over American software engineers being pushed to extinction by H-1B's and outsourcing. I don't see even 100 mediocre Indian engineers replacing a really good American software developer with a systems development background. In the s/w industry, it's really hard to find developers with a solid background in OS and networking. Most developers are in applications or web development. The competition has definitely increased in testing and QA which are not considered to be high-end jobs in the s/w industry anyway. I see so many really smart guys graduating from the top colleges. I don't think they ever have to worry about employment. It is the lower rung that is really in competition with the H-1B's. The anti-H-1B lobby is saying that American s/w engineers are an endangered species but they are really trying to protect the low end workers. The high end workers don't need any protection.

[Middle Ground]

http://www.freedomcast.com/h1b/NIVSolution2006.pdf

Just look at the paper. Read every paragraph. It's fact based.

[legal-forever-waiting-forever]

This is Roy Lawson's blog- he's the PG guy, says he resigned though.

[Legal Immi]

"http://www.freedomcast.com/"

Go to the homepage and headline says "Lou Dobbs a moderate voice on immigration - response to Siskind "

Thats good enough for most of the immigrants or supporters of immigrants to realise what the agenda of this blog is. The headline says it all for me ...

[Middle Ground]

Here is my buddy's "market driven" H-1b approach detailed in May of 2006: http://www.freedomcast.com/h1b/NIVSolution2006.pdf

[Middle Ground]

A guy I know did this... http://www.freedomcast.com/ITJobsQ106.pdf

Good jobs data there, with links to BLS pdfs.

[Middle Ground]

It's been over a year since I worked with the series ids. Where did you get the conversion code? I'm interested in just software engineering and related data - discarding data entry, and fields that don't typically require a 4 year degree.

In short, database admins, programmers, software engineers, analysts, and IT managers.

I had to get the quarterly data from the BLS. I don't have it on me where I am now, but when I get home I'll post a link to a report that details what was discovered.

Reference for previous post:

http://data.bls.gov/PDQ/servlet/SurveyOutputServlet?series_id=LNS14000000&data_tool=%22EaG%22

"Quarterly employment data and unemployment rolls. By that time, unemployment had risen enough to raise flags."

Again, this is not true. The unemployment rate during Sep-Dec 2000 was 3.9%, and this was lower than any time during the prior year. It rose gradually through 2001 until it crossed Sept 2001 after which it crossed 5% and stayed above 5% through the end of 2005.

[Sid]

"PC sales aren't really an indicator of the IT job market. That's like saying you can judge the accounting job market by calculator sales."

That's not entirely true. If there are more IT jobs being created or increase in the number of startups, companies will purchase more PCs. Also, stock market analysts seem to believe that PC sales are related to the health of the tech industry. Dell and HP earnings (from the PC/laptop division) do have an impact on Nasdaq.

[Middle Ground]

"How would anyone know that the market was in decline by October? "

Quarterly employment data and unemployment rolls. By that time, unemployment had risen enough to raise flags.

PC sales aren't really an indicator of the IT job market. That's like saying you can judge the accounting job market by calculator sales.

[Sid]

"You are wrong. The tech market had already started to decline by October - I know because unlike you I wasn't in college at that time - I was actually in the occupation. The decline became more drastic just six months later. A full year later and we had a crises."

I agree with the timing of the decline but most companies and tech workers didn't see it as a major problem till 2001 as the previous post mentions. I did my internship in the valley during 2001 summer and the general consensus was that it was a temporary thing and would soon blow over. The gloom and doom that followed was absent then.

"That didn't stop companies from importing record numbers of H-1b workers. The H-1b visa was in full swing from 2002-2003. Your buddies who went home were quickly replaced."

I think you are getting confused between the Indian outsourcing companies and U.S. based companies. The American companies did not fire H-1B's and then hire their H-1B replacements right away. They outsourced work to Indian companies and those companies brought in the H-1B workers to work at the client site and then take the project back to India. It is true that the employment market during 2001-2003 was tough due to the dual effect of outsourcing and the dotcom bust.

"You are wrong. The tech market had already started to decline by October - I know because unlike you I wasn't in college at that time - I was actually in the occupation. The decline became more drastic just six months later. A full year later and we had a crises."

How would anyone know that the market was in decline by October? By any objective measure, one would not know that the market was in decline in October.

* September 2000 was the 3rd best month for PC sales. Even as late as December IDC was expecting PC market growth in 2001. Connors was the most pessimistic in December, but even he forecast a 2% growth in PC shipments for 2001. In fact 2001 ended with PC shipments down 6%.

http://www.news.com/PC-market-staggers-into-2001-hoping-for-recovery/2100-1001_3-250305.html

* A commonly held belief is that a stock market drop precedes a slowdown by 6 months. Even here, the Nasdaq first dropped in April 2000 and attempted a recovery in August 2000.

http://finance.yahoo.com/charts#chart3:symbol=qqqq;range=my;compare=^dji+^ixic;charttype=line;crosshair=on;logscale=on;source=undefined

I was in the industry and saw the decline from beginning to the end. No one believed that the slowing economy was going to decline until the early part of 2001. It wasn't until 2001 that we had revised forecasts of a severe drop in spending.

* This is anecdotal, but I was in the industry back then and my employer managed to get itself acquired at bubble valuations at the beginning of 2001.

"Of course that crises didn't trigger an immediate end to H-1b approvals in our occupation. "

Yes, this is a fair statement. Question is what type of mechanism would work given that there is always a lag before market realities show up in the data. H1B approvals did drop by about 50% between 2001 and 2002 (couldn't find data for 2003), but yes one could say that they didn't drop fast enough.

Year H1B approvals for initial employment
2001 201,079
2002 103,584

[Middle Ground]

"This is not true. The H1B cap was raised from 115,000 to 195,000 in October 2000. The 2001 recession did not start until March 2001."

You are wrong. The tech market had already started to decline by October - I know because unlike you I wasn't in college at that time - I was actually in the occupation. The decline became more drastic just six months later. A full year later and we had a crises.

Of course that crises didn't trigger an immediate end to H-1b approvals in our occupation. Harris Miller of the ITAA was shortage shouting during the peak of the recession. A program to fill "shortages" was flooding the market when there was no shortage.

"I graduated in 2002 and plenty of my friends had to return to India because no one would sponsor an H-1B."

That didn't stop companies from importing record numbers of H-1b workers. The H-1b visa was in full swing from 2002-2003. Your buddies who went home were quickly replaced.

Things didn't start going seriously south until the first quarter of 2001. Microsoft warned in Dec 2000, but Adobe and Oracle actually managed to beat estimates.

http://www.crn.com/it-channel/18812641

http://www.smartmoney.com/bn/index.cfm?story=20001215094054

"The ITAA was crying shortage long after the tech bust occured. I can't possibly know what they were thinking before the bust occured, but what I know for certain is that after there was already massive job loss in IT, Congress voted to raise the H-1b cap from 115,000 to 195,000 at the behest of industry."

This is not true. The H1B cap was raised from 115,000 to 195,000 in October 2000. The 2001 recession did not start until March 2001.

http://www.zazona.com/ShameH1B/H1BHistory.htm
http://www.nber.org/cycles.html

[Sid]

The whole theory about H-1B's being hired in hordes while Americans were being laid off during the bust years is a whole lot of bull. I graduated in 2002 and plenty of my friends had to return to India because no one would sponsor an H-1B. Fortunately, I found a job and managed to stay afloat on the OPT till things started improving towards the end of 2003. A lot of my ex-colleagues in India who were on H-1B were laid off and had to go back during 2000-2002. To say that H-1B's were not laid off during the bust years is the biggest lie perpetrated by the H-1B opponents.

[Legal Immi]

"As far as applicationst to Microsoft, they hire a small percentage of applicants. It is a desireable company to work for. It is laughable that they can't find qualified workers when damn near every IT worker in the country is trying to work for them."

Every one wants to work for google too, it does not mean that everyone is qualified to work for the google or microsoft. Trust me given a choice google or microsoft dont want to deal with immigration issues because the kind of cost they have to pay for the immigration process on top of the salary. Hiring a foreign worker is much more expensive than hiring an american worker.

Recently a friend of mine was hired by a big insurance company and their corporate law firm charged $8k in fees for transferring the H1B.

The supporters of Sen. Durbin make us beleive that giving a releif to the EB immigrants is somehow hurt american workers where as giving mass "amnesty" by dream act is good.

Just for the argument sake lets assume that there 4 million people eligible for dream act legalization out of which a million end up in IT. Doesn't this hurt american IT worker?

One cannot be for mass legalization of 12 to 20 million people and at the same time want to put more restrictions on legal immigration. The end result of that kind of policy is repeat of 1986 legalization.

[legal-forever-waiting-forever]

I think the H1 increases were all voted on together and were put in place before the bust. they did not vote to increase from 115,000 to 195,000- in fact i think they voted to increase from 65,000 step wise ever year up to 195,000 (over 2-3 years) all in one vote. So the increases were already set in place and were automatic. Once the provision sunset the numbers came back to the original. Correct me if I'm mistaken here.

[Middle Ground]

"This is what left parties think all over the world about the business. Some how these left guys want us to beleive that everyone running a business is evil. "

I run a business. I am hardly a leftist. This isn't about party or some anti (global) business agenda. This is about ethics. The IT lobbyists (such as the ITAA) completely lack ethics. The facts are clear. During the times that IT workers were suffering from massive job loss, the ITAA was crying shortage. You can pull the "leftist business hater card" if you want, but the facts speak for themself.

As far as applicationst to Microsoft, they hire a small percentage of applicants. It is a desireable company to work for. It is laughable that they can't find qualified workers when damn near every IT worker in the country is trying to work for them.

[Legal Immi]

"In short, it wasn't a lack of forsight. It was malfeasance."

This is what left parties think all over the world about the business. Some how these left guys want us to beleive that everyone running a business is evil.

BTW how many resumes did programmers guild send to microsoft. I beleive they were asked to send qualified resumes to microsoft.

[Middle Ground]

"But were these not put in place before the tech bust actually started? In other words I'm wondering if it was lack of foresight or malfeasance on the part of companies that knew a bust was coming?"

The ITAA was crying shortage long after the tech bust occured. I can't possibly know what they were thinking before the bust occured, but what I know for certain is that after there was already massive job loss in IT, Congress voted to raise the H-1b cap from 115,000 to 195,000 at the behest of industry.

In short, it wasn't a lack of forsight. It was malfeasance.

[legal-forever-waiting-forever]

Just curious- MG- clearly the enhanced quotas during 2001-03 have played their parts in the current immigration impasse. But were these not put in place before the tech bust actually started? In other words I'm wondering if it was lack of foresight or malfeasance on the part of companies that knew a bust was coming?

[Middle Ground]

"By simple smell test, I have a feeling that it is indeed protected by first amendment. Any comments?"

It's protected speech. I believe displays that are threatening in nature are not protected. For example, (and this is discusting I know) a noose from a tree hanging a black person in effigy in conjuction with swastikas would probably not be protected.

I had heard that the Osama t-shirts with OBL in the crosshairs of a rifle scope (sold shortly after 9/11) were deemed illegal in some states.

It is like yelling "fire" in a theatre. Some forms of speech are not protected because of public safety issues.

I stayed at a Holiday Day Inn Express. ;-)

[Legal Immi]

Greg,

Is there is any law that prohibits americans from displaying nazi flags in their front yard.

I saw one hoisted in Columbus OH , in a predominantly black/gay neighborhood. I know that it is disgusting to display one, but my question is whether it is protected by First Amendment.

By simple smell test, I have a feeling that it is indeed protected by first amendment. Any comments?

[Middle Ground]

"And what would you do with those people who work on the farms? "

We are mixing two different programs (the focus of my last post were the H-1b/L1 visas). For low-skilled jobs, I still believe in economic measurements to determine caps - as opposed to arbitrary numbers. Obviously a college degree won't apply.

In all cases, I support full portability of visas from one employer to another - with no negative consequence on impemending immigrations requests, such as permanent residence.

Employers (or at least their lobbyists) oppose portability because they want indentured workers unable to participate on the free labor market.

People say "oh, you only support portability and a GC instead of the H-1b because you are trying to change the subject - and you really want to block all H-1b legislation." Suppose I really didn't care about immigrants (which is not the case). My other motivation is simple - exploitation of immigrants harms American workers. So it is in my economic interest that immigrants not be exploited by their employers.

[TX]

"Plus, I think preferences should be given (based on salary, experience, and degree) so that "elite" immigration programs like the H-1b and L1 are really directed at the best and brightest and not primarily a source of cheap labor."

And what would you do with those people who work on the farms? Just because the profession does'nt require a degree and does'nt pay much does'nt mean it's not important. If we forget about the low skilled low paid we will still have the issue because these people are indeed doing jobs that no one else wants.

[Middle Ground]

"but without some accounting for the need for a guest worker program and also future demand for green cards, we'll have this debate again in another ten or fifteen years. "

I think it needs to be on "auto-pilot". The annual caps should be based on economic data. You can bet that you and I will debate our asses off on what constistutes the best source of this economic data ;-) but arbitrary caps clearly don't work.

Plus, I think preferences should be given (based on salary, experience, and degree) so that "elite" immigration programs like the H-1b and L1 are really directed at the best and brightest and not primarily a source of cheap labor.

When times are tough for us (like from 2001-2003) the cap was raised. I don't want that occuring ever again. It added insult to injury.

What you don't seem to always remember is how vivid those years still are on the minds of hundreds of thousands of IT professionals who took direct hits to their careers. And how industry groups like the ITAA created these imaginary shortages to justify it - while at the same time labor data indicated high unemployment and massive job cuts.

During the high h-1b cap, we noticed a huge decline in opportunities. Now that the cap fell to historic levels, we are noticing a better situation. Certainly not like it was during the tech bubble, but much better than 2001-2003. I don't care what you do with doctors, but IT numbers need to remain in balance with where they are today.

It was clearly a slight on American IT workers what occured from 2001-2003.

[Greg Siskind]

Grouchy - No idea about family, but I suspect if there are any, the kids were born here.

[Greg Siskind]

MG - I agree. Like just about every hard decision Congress needs to make - on the federal budget, Social Security, health care, immigration, etc. - Congress will ignore the problem and hope it goes away rather than taking it head on. When people complain that the '86 amnesty didn't work, I remind them that it worked quite well for the 3,000,000 people already here, but it never dealt with the future of the country. The same is true today. We can have a legalization program, but without some accounting for the need for a guest worker program and also future demand for green cards, we'll have this debate again in another ten or fifteen years.

[grouchy]

Greg i'm just curious. I have a question.

Does this former Nazi hitman- Mr Hartmann still has family members in the US? If so, how would this affect their legalization here, connected to past atrocities of their father? And since he was already been deported, are there any consequences or grounds that possibly face his family in the future? Thanks.

[Middle Ground]

"antis have been trying to convey the false impression that convicted criminals were somehow going to benefit from the legalization program. "

It's unfortunate that both sides can't have an honest debate about this. I agree that "antis" as you call them introduce arguments that aren't entirely truthful. Both sides do.

I don't see anything wrong with amnesty as long as tough workplace enforcement comes along with it - and those enforcements are actually carried out. Hopefully Congress can get it right this time around.

If after the amnesty laws in the 80s were passed enforcement provisions were also passed, we wouldn't be where we are today.

Amnesty isn't the problem. The fact that our only real option is amnesty is the problem. We painted ourselves into a corner because Congress for the past 20+ years didn't have the appetite to really tackle this issue before it became an issue again.

But that is the story of Congress. They don't really pre-empt problems. They wait until we have a crises until they act.

[Greg Siskind]

Hi MG - Knew I could get your attention with this post. Incidentally, US immigration law already bars most felons (and a lot of folks only convicted of misdemeanors) from immigrating and the legalization program would not have changed that. I know you didn't suggest it, but a lot of the antis have been trying to convey the false impression that convicted criminals were somehow going to benefit from the legalization program.

[Middle Ground]

Not everyone deserves amnesty either. For example, anyone convicted of a felony.

Most of the Nazis from the WWII generation are dead or dying of old age. Hopefully OSI is successful at apprehending the latest breed of war criminals.

Until we have strong interior enforcement there is really very little we can do about these people living beneath the radar. How many current or future "Eichmans" will live freely in this country because of our weak interior enforcement?

I think the one thing the pro-illegal immigration crowd has right is that a 10 foot wall will only result in an abundance of 11 foot ladders. Interior enforcement - focused on the workplace - is the best solution to this problem. And that will enable the OSI to do their jobs more effectively.