March 13, 2007
How to help the huddled masses through immigration
Next week I hope to visit the US. I will put it no more strongly than that. I have learnt not to take my right to visit America for granted – ever since being ignominiously deported in 2003.
When I rang my wife from Dulles airport to tell her that I was being put on the first plane home, she briefly feared that I was about to reveal a double life as an international drug-smuggler or pornographer. Nothing so interesting. I had simply forgotten to get myself a journalist’s visa.
The best stories of this sort usually involve the innocent foreigner being shackled or bundled off to the state penitentiary. Not in my case. The officials dealing with me were polite, sympathetic – but implacable. I protested feebly that I was a former Fulbright scholar who had lived in the US for several years. I had written for American journals, I knew important people, Britain was fighting alongside the US in Iraq. None of it cut any ice. As one of the immigration people explained: “We could have made an exception before 9/11, but not now.”
Eventually we settled down to fill in the long questionnaire for deportees. The last question was: “Do you have anything further you want to say?” I said “no”. The immigration officer smiled faintly and said: “That’s good, because normally people tell me to ‘F off’ at this point.” A few hours later I was flying back to London.
As a result of my unfortunate oversight, entering the US is always a bit of a performance. I am now wearily familiar with the look of consternation that crosses the immigration officer’s face, as my name comes up on the computer. Then I get pulled over for a “secondary inspection”. Usually, after 15 minutes or so, I am on my way.
But I am far from alone in feeling uneasy when I find myself in an American immigration line. In November, a survey of more than 2,000 regular foreign travellers found that 66 per cent of them agreed with the statement: “If you make a simple mistake or say the wrong thing to US immigration or security officials, you might be detained for hours or worse.” Even to me, this seems hysterical. After all, some 1.1m foreigners enter the US every day and, as I have enviously noted, most of them sail through immigration with no problem at all.
However, the survey for the Discover America partnership – a group of big businesses that seeks to promote tourism – also suggested that 39 per cent of regular travellers rate the US “worst” for immigration and entry procedures; the Middle East came second on 16 per cent. Discover America complains of a “climate of fear” and a “travel crisis”. It cites a “near 20 per cent drop in the United States share of overseas travellers since 2000” and claims that this has cost 200,000 jobs and $93bn in revenue.
There is always a slightly spurious precision about figures like these. But it is not just the tourism industry that is complaining. A McKinsey report into America’s financial services industry, also published in January, warned that New York risks losing its status as the “financial capital of the world” within 10 years. The first two problems it cited were over-regulation and fear of litigation. But problem three was “US immigration restrictions which are shutting out highly skilled workers”. Getting foreign businessmen into the US for one-off meetings can be a problem. Long-term work visas are an even bigger issue. One financial service executive is quoted as complaining: “It is much easier to hire talented people in the UK – I couldn’t hire the team I need in the US and I wouldn’t bother trying.”
The McKinsey report says Wall Street is still the best place to find talent. But the City of London is catching up, as it benefits from free movement of workers within the European Union and the fact that Britain does not have a quota-limit on work visas, even for non-Europeans.
Testifying before Congress last week, Bill Gates of Microsoft argued that US computing companies are also suffering from a severe skills shortage and that: “America’s immigration policies are driving away the best and brightest, precisely when we need them most.” Mr Gates sees an interlocking set of problems. A smaller proportion of international students are now studying at American universities, partly because it is made so hard for foreign graduates to then get a job in the US.
In 2001, the US issued 200,000 H-1B visas for highly skilled workers. That figure has now shrunk to about 65,000 a year. A big increase is promised, if and when a new immigration act is finally passed. But in the meantime Mr Gates complains that American companies are shifting research and development work overseas.
Presenting an unwelcoming face to the world has political as well as economic implications. Surveys regularly show that foreigners who have actually visited the US have a much more favourable impression of the country. The same report that uncovered widespread fear of American immigration procedures reported that 72 per cent of visitors had a “great” experience inside the US.
The good news for the US is that so far the damage is at the margins. American universities, investment banks and computing companies are still clearly the world leaders. The American government has shown that it is keen to improve immigration procedures. The annual number of student visas issued for the US, after falling for some years, rose in 2006. The number of business visas issued for the US also rose. The waiting time to get a visa interview in India, which used to be notorious, has been cut back to a few days. Tourist numbers are also going up again. A lot more needs to be done. But at least there is an awareness of the problem.
As for myself, when I am in Washington next week (God willing), I will make a point of cultivating people who might one day get top government jobs. I would do this anyway for professional reasons. But I also have an ulterior motive. Perhaps one day, one of my friends will get me off the immigration watch list. I explained my reasoning recently to one National Security Council hopeful. His reply was not encouraging: “Sorry – but it would easier for me to launch an air strike than to get your name out of the immigration computer.”
This is advice of the world’s richest man to our leaders in the Senate? This is a prime example of how out of touch elitists like Mr. Gates are with respect to the plight of this country’s middle class worker. Allowing a limitless amount of H1B visas would result in an overwhelming flow of foreign technology workers into the country and push an unimaginable number of US workers out of a job. Perhaps Mr. Gates is unfamiliar with the laws of supply and demand? Simply put, the foreign workers will have a lower reservation wage, meaning they will work for less. In other words, the market will be flooded with cheap labor. While this may be great for businesses like Microsoft, it’s not so great for the American middle class. Gates apparently disavows himself from the idea that we have a right to make a living and provide for our families. Haven’t the businesses had enough tax breaks and favorable legislation in the past decade? When will we start hearing about ways in which this Congress and this Administration will begin to ease the exhausting burden to the workers who are making people like Mr. Gates so flush with money and success?
Posted by: Willie | March 14th, 2007 at 3:31 pm | Report this commentHi Willie,
It seems to me that the many tens of thousands of (very) highly skilled foreign workers in the silicon valley and Wall Street are not there due to their lower wages (their wages are mostly very high indeed), but due to their superior skills.
If you don’t allow such highly qualified people in, it is very unlikely that the companies will employ under-qualified American workers instead. It is more likely that they will simply relocate the business overseas causing more job losses among the American workers and a loss of tax revenue.
The way to go is surely to upgrade the education and training of the American worker, not legislate against skilled foreigners.
BTW, I can assure you that I have no intention whatsoever of working in (or even visiting) the USA!!
All the best,
P
Posted by: Pacifist | March 14th, 2007 at 4:47 pm | Report this commentP,
I’m in agreement with you on the education issue. I am also an advocate of allowing a limited number to H1B visas for foreign workers. Where this becomes unhinged in my mind is when the visa’s are unlimited. It’s a widely under-reported fact: The middle class is getting hammered in the US. We are getting an increasingly smaller piece of the pie while our corporate masters are raking in record profits and distributing the wealth among the execs, not the middle-managers and workers. I’ve had friends lose jobs only to find they were replaced from somebody from India or China who is willing to work for less.
So I agree about education; our public education system is at an all-time low and this must be a priority (waiting out the Bush Administration until I realistically expect any action here or in a vast array of other arenas). But globalization has allowed corporations to reign superior and it certainly won’t help hard working people to have to compete with, admittedly, more talented, lower-paid foreign workers. I am thinking of what’s best for people, not companies.
And while its true this may cause some companies to move abroad, I do not foresee this happening en masse. It’s also true that not all foreign workers are paid less, but most are.
Lastly, sorry to hear you won’t be visiting the USA. But I can certainly see why I would probably feel the same way given the horrid policies of the Bush Admin.
Posted by: Willie | March 14th, 2007 at 5:23 pm | Report this commentIt’s a pity about the nativism of the US. I’m currently doing research on economic development that involves a lot of survey work and the thing I keep hearing about is the lack of skilled workers. We need them any way we can get them, through better training and education at home and through H1B to get people from abroad. The fact is that in the global economy, if we isolate ourselves as the US is now doing, we’re going to get killed.
And the broader picture is a vicious spiral. Being unqualified is one part of the picture; the other part of the picture is that multinational corporations have figured out that US workers on average are under-educated and under-trained and frankly not worth the trouble — easier to set up a facility in some other country. Immigrants are less and less of a factor, even though they’re increasing in number — frankly most of the ones that get in are as unqualified as we are. If, as in one city I’ve looked at that has less than three percent unemployment, a large box retailer new to the area gets 4,000 applications for 300 mostly low-skill jobs, while two specialty manufacturing firms have dozens of vacancies for qualified welders, what does that tell you about the state of our workforce? Lots of people unhappy in their current jobs, maybe a bit underpaid, but woefully unqualified for anything better. It’s the same at every level, up to and including high-end corporate services. New York used to have twice as many financial services workers as London and the British if anything were pickier on visas. If you wanted it done right, you were more likely to get the employees you needed in New York. Now they’re in a tie for their financial services workforces and the British no longer fret about giving visas, while the US just won’t give them out any more. So obviously London has the advantage and the momentum.
Posted by: DB | March 15th, 2007 at 1:53 am | Report this commenthttp://www.ft.com/cms/s/89aac4dc-6777-11db-8ea5-0000779e2340.html
Dear DB And Willie,
I recommend the above excellent article by Larry Summers. It deals with the points you raise very well.
Best regards,
P
Posted by: Pacifist | March 15th, 2007 at 10:40 am | Report this comment