Obama opposes House passage of H.R. 6429

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-57556074-38/obama-opposes-silicon-valley-firms-on-immigration-reform/

by prostoalex • 14 years ago

99 105 14 years ago

news.cnet.com

gsibble• 14 years ago

Sweet, delicious irony....

001sky2• 14 years ago

One reason it's controversial among Democrats is that the bill would eliminate the 55,000 diversity visas available to citizens of countries with low immigration rates to the United States.

-- Sticking point.

sharkweek3• 14 years ago

The White House response is worth a quick read (PDF --- http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/legislativ...).

I spent the majority of my undergrad studying immigration policy, and I can sympathize with the WH's point that chipping away at immigration reform will only complicate broader reforms that eventually need to happen. The bill as written sounds a little unfair as it removes thousands of diversity visas and allows the educated a quick jump to the front of the line.

I understand economically why this would be desirable, but it isn't true reform.

tymathews• 14 years ago

This shouldn't be a surprise to anyone. Pres. Obama deported more immigrants his first term than Bush.

dmk23• 14 years ago

I hope all the Obama supporters here still feel good about helping re-elect the man.

Rest assured he is still going to support amnesty for unskilled illegals who are more likely to vote Democrat for years to come.

EDIT: It is pretty funny how the downvoters fail to acknowledge the basic facts about the politics of the issue and instead fall for the Administration's excuses and rush to condemn "conspiracy theories". There are no theories here, just basic facts.

hack_edu2• 14 years ago

Chill out. This has nothing to do with skilled/unskilled, illegal/legal. Its about reform for all of immigration policy, not just those who can already make a living for themselves anywhere. Plus, and I hate to say it, but there's very clearly much greater need (not demand, need) for the sorts of jobs 'unskilled illegals' end up doing than the high-skill (read: class) jobs that this piece of legislation addresses.

And stop this immigrants-voting-schtick conspiracy theory. The impact their inclusion would make would doubtly even be within the margin of error. People have much better things to do.

jdminhbg• 14 years ago

> (not demand, need)

Wow.

ekm2• 14 years ago

Right,the american economy is in danger of tanking if the country does not hire more janitors.Science and Engineering phds can look after themselves elsewhere,Canada maybe?

ibarrac• 14 years ago

I disagree. There is a larger need for skilled workers: that's why they command much higher wages.

I think dmk23 is right. Since Obama got elected there seems to be a higher rate of denials for H1B applications and renewals, without clear guidelines why. Looks like pressure from above. See http://www.indianexpress.com/news/obama-warned-over-h1b-visa...

It does seem like Obama favors unskilled immigration (amnesty for illegals and the like) over skilled immigration, which I think frankly, is stupid and short-sighted, pandering to his increasingly powerful latino (mostly Mexican-American) voters.

msgilligan• 14 years ago

The immigrants-voting-schtick ain't no conspiracy theory. It's simple demographics (~10million x ~70% ~= net +4 million votes for the Democrats). I'm pro-amnesty, but ignoring the obvious electoral effect and the partisan interests around it is just not thinking clearly.

yardie• 14 years ago

The bill presented is crap. That is a fact.

nhashem2• 14 years ago

From the administration's response:

"As a part of immigration reform, the Administration strongly supports legislation to attract and retain foreign students who graduate with advanced STEM degrees, to establish a start-up visa for foreign-born entrepreneurs to start businesses and create jobs, and to reform the employment-based immigration system to better meet the needs of the U.S. economy. However, the Administration does not support narrowly tailored proposals that do not meet the President's long-term objectives with respect to comprehensive immigration reform."

Essentially this bill "converts" the 55,000 "diversity visas" currently available into "STEM visas."

It looks like this bill originated from the Republican party, so I'm wondering why they didn't just write a bill that allocated additional STEM visas without "cannibalizing" the diversity visas.

btilly• 14 years ago

Because they want to force Democrats to be on record voting against letting entrepreneurs into the country. The potential for attack ads during the next election cycle matters more in Washington DC than actually getting things done.

sharkweek3• 14 years ago

A little OT : Here's a great example of a bill being written with explicit intent of making anyone who votes against it look like a terrible person:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protecting_Children_from_Intern...

Written by Lamar Smith, Mr. Privacy Invader himself -- make sure to read the Privacy issues section of the wiki page

jbooth• 14 years ago

This, exactly. If congressional republicans actually wanted the additional STEM visas, they could pass a clean bill doing only that and Obama would probably sign it, based on the statement above.

mayneack• 14 years ago

Except they can't force the (Senate) Democrats to vote on it because they can just not bring it up and it will die in January.

Also, while this is framed as an immigration bill, the Democrats won't take too much bad PR in important (Hispanic) immigrant communities because the vast majority of those aren't the tech job type.

Holding out for a comprehensive plan is probably a good move for Obama because he can include this as an incentive to vote for it. If they don't get some sort of comprehensive plan, it's still good because the Democrats could basically just introduce this without the zero-sum part and then the Republicans will be the ones against both skilled and unskilled immigrants.

Vivtek• 14 years ago

And if they vote for it, Democrats can be accused of being hypocritical when it comes to diversity. It's a no-lose situation for the GOP.

rndmize• 14 years ago

If this is the case, the title of the article strikes me as poorly chosen.

davorak• 14 years ago

Given the number of articles that have been as poorly chosen it would not surprise me if this was the case.

onetwothreefour2• 14 years ago

The title of the article strikes me as one written by a Republican. This is a terrible bill, that's why it's not being signed.

anigbrowl4• 14 years ago

Declan McCullough's reporting on legal issues frequently seems completely off base to me.

mynameishere• 14 years ago

without "cannibalizing" the diversity visas.

Well, the diversity visas were the most brutal possible attack on sanity ever passed by a legislature. "Oh, you came from XYZ wretched backwater, here's your VISA...on the basis of your wretchedness." Sad, sad, sad, to live in such dismal times.

philwelch• 14 years ago

Isn't that a sensible humanitarian policy?

scarmig• 14 years ago

It is, of course, totally insane to let people voluntarily choose to work here and make voluntary economic transactions with other adults who voluntarily want to pay them money to provide goods and services for Americans to voluntarily purchase.

ptgloden• 14 years ago

"Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free." - a certain statue's impossibly brutal attack on sanity

JVIDEL• 14 years ago

Actually a lot of poor countries don't qualify because there are already too many of their citizens living in the US, legally or illegally.

That's the "diversity" part, and the list includes many rich countries too.

stfp3• 14 years ago

Can't tell if serious? A datapoint: I moved to California, from France, on a diversity visa. I have randomly met 3 other french engineers who have done the same in my first couple months here.

In the worst case it's a tiny drop wrt. to general immigration, and I'm ready to bet it tends to in fact attract highly motivated people.

kalleboo2• 14 years ago

Are you calling most of Western Europe (including Germany, France, all the Scandinavian countries) "wretched backwaters"? What country DOESN'T count as a wretched backwater, aside from the U.S. of course?

temphn2• 14 years ago

What is the argument for 55000 random visas at a time when the US economy is doing very poorly? Is this a game? US citizenship clearly has market value. Billions of dollars could be raised by turning these into entrepreneur visas or charging per visa (it's not like the US doesn't already do this, but the price is way too low).

If we're taxing current citizens, and we have 50% exit taxes, why not entry taxes? When demand exceeds supply increase the price.

onetwothreefour2• 14 years ago

Thanks for weighing in with your uninformed opinion on something while also invoking the age old "when the US economy is doing very poorly" straw man which has nothing to do with the DV lottery.

Those DV lottery winners pay US taxes while having no citizenship rights, so you have literally no idea what you're talking about.

andrewpi• 14 years ago

I believe DV winners have citizenship rights after residing in the US for 5 years.

aioprisan• 14 years ago

actually, after 5 years you can apply for citizenship

untog• 14 years ago

Visa != citizenship

And there are already plenty of routes for rich people to obtain visas, just by proving that they have a lot of money. These visas are for workers.

drx• 14 years ago

> Billions of dollars could be raised by turning these into entrepreneur visas or charging per visa (it's not like the US doesn't already do this, but the price is way too low)

Every year a number of EB-5 visas go unclaimed (which cost around $550K per family).

Daniel_Newby2• 14 years ago

The US economy is doing poorly because of energy policy, not population size.

> Billions of dollars could be raised by turning these into entrepreneur visas or charging per visa ...

Billions of dollars would be like pissing on a supernova. Putting out the fiscal fire will take trillions of dollars in economic reform and growth, and immigrants have historically been a big part of American boom times.

temphn2• 14 years ago

Oh, I agree with you that billions are nothing relative to what this government is spending. Bernanke prints $85 billion every month. Even charging 1 million dollars for each of these 50000 visas would raise only $50 billion.

That said, the guys who could afford to pay that would better than these "lottery" admits. Young STEM grads would also be good. Canada and Singapore have far more rational immigration policies, where there is consideration given to whether a given immigrant will be a net tax-payer or tax-recipient; young STEM grads and entrepreneurs with money are favored categories -- and they do not give away coveted visas at random.

People act as if the US has infinite money to just give away, that we can be never-endingly generous with no consequences, that the quality of person we take in has no impact. Then they turn around and post on Hacker News about how you need to watch your burn rate and only hire the best for your startup.

ajays• 14 years ago

On the other hand: does the glut of tech workers drive down wages? If you strictly look at it from a supply/demand angle, one could argue that if these companies wanted more techies, they could just pay more. Being able to increase supply at will (i.e. import techies) will naturally drive down prices (i.e. wages).

The same argument is made about illegal immigration: these immigrants fill low-end jobs that don't pay well; but their availability ensures that these jobs will never pay well.

Please don't get me wrong: I'm not opposed to immigration or this bill.I'm just asking about the impact; I'm not taking sides, so no flames please.

wtvanhest• 14 years ago

I can't imagine why US engineers would support a bill like this from a benefit analysis perspective. It should be obvious that if you add engineers, prices will go down. I can completely understand supporting it for moral reasons however.

prostoalex• 14 years ago

1) It's not a whole lot different than H1-B and those haven't led to wage collapse.

2) Engineers who come into the US tend to start an insignificant number of new businesses, which, in turn, employ other engineers.

3) Countries that severely limit work visas have not turned into meccas of software development.

4) Companies will only increase pay up to a certain ceiling. At some point either the product economics don't make sense, or finding a dedicated development team in Romania/Poland/Ukraine is worth it even with communication overhead.

moultano• 14 years ago

I like working with colleagues from other countries. (I'm also marrying one.) I'd rather the best of the world do their great work inside of the US rather than outside.

Daniel_Newby2• 14 years ago

> It should be obvious that if you add engineers, prices will go down.

STEM is not a zero sum game. Adding personnel does not simply cut the pie into more pieces, it grows the pie. It's OK to get fewer dollars if those dollars can buy a self-driving car or a cure for Alzheimer's disease.

nhashem2• 14 years ago

You raise an interesting concept, but as US-born software engineer, this is why I'm not too concerned:

- Unlike low-skill manufacturing jobs, most technology jobs are not commodity work. To put it another way: if the US gave out visas to 55,000 people who got an acting degree, I doubt Brad Pitt would have to take a paycut on his next movie.

- A lot of the companies sponsoring this bill are software companies, but STEM isn't just software engineering. The applicants here are in a wide variety of fields. How many of them will specifically get a computer science degree with the explicit goal of getting a job at Google? Some, sure, but not all 55,000. They'll go into other fields and other industries and I don't think the total volume of talent in each particular STEM industry will be enough to significantly impact wages.

- Whatever these people were going to do in the US in terms of entrepreneurship, if they can't get a visa they'll just go back to their home country and do it there. So it's just as possible they'd start their own companies and need to hire software engineers, which would actually have upward pressure on wages.

seldo6• 14 years ago

As a recent immigrant myself -- I got my green card last week, after a 5-year application process, and I'm one of the lucky ones -- I'm a huge fan of immigration reform. However, this is not the bill to do it. The 55,000 diversity visas are an essential part of how immigration should work: there should be more of them, not less. While we need more STEM educated immigrants, it should not be at the expense of other visa types.

GuiA• 14 years ago

I'm unfamiliar with diversity visas- who are they for, and what "good" are they supposed to provide?

sharkweek3• 14 years ago

lottery system for immigration, focused heavily on bringing in immigrants from countries that have lower immigration rates to the US -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diversity_Immigrant_Visa

seldo6• 14 years ago

They are Visas available to anybody, for any reason, from any country. They are good because immigration is good.

But let me explain a bit further.

Most American visas are related to a specific job, or a family connection, or education. You can't just turn up and stay -- you have to have a reason, and a ton of documentation. But that's not how immigration has, historically, worked: the original American colonists and those that followed them through the 1700s and 1800s didn't arrive knowing where they'd live and what job they'd have. They arrived hoping to make a better life for their children, with no clear plan of how. That's what these visas are for.

The situation is complicated slightly further because these are restricted to low-immigration-rate countries. Basically, there are a billion Indians and more than a billion Chinese: even a very small percentage of them applying for a visa lottery would mean that 99% of visas went to people from those countries. Therefore, to get immigrants from a broader range of countries, visas for people from countries that send a lot of applications every year are handled separately, under their own quotas. The remaining countries are all lumped together and given a group quota: these are the "diversity" visas.

If you would like a more fundamental answer to why immigration is good, I'm happy to oblige, just ask :-)

deepGem• 14 years ago

I don't understand what's really wrong in diverting 55,000 visas from a random, unplanned allocation scheme (diversity) to a more metrics driven allocation scheme (education). How is this not 'true reform'?

pyre• 14 years ago

Is there a reason that we need to reallocate current visas? Why not just create 55K new STEM visas?

wmil• 14 years ago

The only requirement for a diversity visa is a high school equivalent. Considering how poor the job market is for HS only graduates, limiting visas to people with marketable skills makes a lot of sense.

rhizome2• 14 years ago

This way more less-educated people will have to stay in their home countries while an increased capacity for "advanced STEM degree" holders will both sap the intelligent workers from other countries and convert them into US taxpayers who are relatively captive as long as they want to stay in the US.

zem• 14 years ago

> White House announcement before congressional vote on STEM Jobs Act puts president in opposition to many of the Silicon Valley firms and executives who bankrolled his re-election campaign.

it's sad that this was the point cnet chose to highlight as the subheading. bankrolling a politician's campaign should not create in him a sense of obligation.

psychotik• 14 years ago

As a legal immigrant who has been in the country for 12 years and still waiting for a green card, I'm willing to accept that the administration will reject this bill if and only if it makes good on its promise for comprehensive reform. I also oppose the idea of cannibalizing the diversity visas - that seems to go against the spirit of the foundation of America's origins.

drpgq• 14 years ago

IEEE-USA is for this bill? I always thought they were in the camp that this drives down tech wages and promotes ageism.

ck2• 14 years ago

Remember the house likes to do the opposite of what he wants.

Too bad he didn't want single payer.

marknutter2• 14 years ago

I'm not sure it was a good idea to oppose this. It's essentially the republicans saying "We don't want to let any more people in the country, but of the people we are letting in, we prefer the highly educated". In a time when countries like China are graduating 50k engineers a year, you'd think being choosy about who you let into the country would make sense. And I don't see how signing this hurts the Democrats' long term plan for immigration reform. I assume that involves bringing more people into the country, so ok, bring more in later when the economy recovers. Not compromising on this bill setting a bad precedence for any compromise that may happen in the future.

commandar7• 14 years ago

It takes away the Republicans' opportunity to claim they already addressed immigration reform and that any further action is the President "going too far."

The Republicans are between a rock and a hard place politically on immigration. Latinos are the fastest-growing demographic in the country, and Republican hostility toward immigration reform is starting to cost them in elections. e.g., Obama pummeled Romney among Latino voters in Florida by an over 2-to-1 margin. [1]

The Republicans have essentially painted themselves into a corner on the issue and are in a no-win situation. If they continue to aggressively oppose immigration reform, it's going to hurt them with an increasingly-important demographic. If they concede and compromise, Obama and the Democrats get to claim themselves as the champions of immigration reform, which still hurts the Republicans, though to a lesser degree.

Obama knows he has major leverage over the Republicans on this issue; it doesn't make political sense to make concessions they can paint as wins if it's not the reform he's actually after.

[1] http://www.pewhispanic.org/2012/11/07/latino-voters-in-the-2...

marknutter2• 14 years ago

Thanks for the insight, I suppose it does sound like he made the right choice for his party. Interesting.

eaurouge2• 14 years ago

The diversity lottery is actually good immigration policy. Each year you take a sample of average or above average (applicants must have a high school education and no criminal history, and must pass some health tests as well; they must also show they will not be a burden to society once they get in) from countries around the world with historically low immigration rates to your country.

Essentially these are candidates that have self-selected as being willing to start anew in a new country, working hard to improve their lives in the process. In return, your culture is enriched and your economy is boosted by a fresh set of ambitious, hard-working 1st-generation immigrants. Some of these immigrants may go on to become engineers, teachers, doctors, cab drivers, entrepreneurs, nurses etc. But they won't drain your social safety net, they will contribute to it. They're here to work, to make up for lost time, and to make a better future for their offspring. As immigration policies go, I think this is one of the better ones.

enraged_camel• 14 years ago

I think what is more important is that since this administration took over, rejection rates for skilled visa applications have skyrocketed.

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/obama-warned-over-h1b-visa...

As someone who has had to respond to two RFEs so far - once for my initial H1B application and once for my green card application, I get the feeling that I am not wanted in this country. I have seriously contemplated moving back overseas more than once.

antidoh• 14 years ago

If they're not going to let foreigners educated in US universities stay, then they shouldn't let foreigners take up space in universities. It makes no sense to make the seat available with no possibility of intellectual payback.

Obama opposes House passage of H.R. 6429

Related Stories