Christmas week is usually the quietest time on the political calendar, but this year conservatives at Political H-1B fraud and the indentured servitude facilitated by the Indian “Body Shop” cartel companies that monopolize these visas deserves serious attention. Before we discuss expanding so-called high-skilled visas, let's first fulfill Donald Trump's original promise to reduce other immigration categories to historic standards.
Legislation to end chain immigration already exists, and Trump supported it during his first term. of
American Immigration Reform for Strong Economic LawsThe plan, first sponsored by Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) in 2017, would cut legal immigration in half, eliminate the “extended family” category of chain immigrants, and increase the number of 60,000 cases a year selected by lottery. The “diversity visa” was scheduled to be abolished. It would also cut the refugee program to 50,000 people a year. It's an amendment to outdated 1965 and 1990 immigration laws that handed out 1.1 million green cards a year for decades.
This time, American citizens come first, immigrants later.
The 1965 law forced immigration authorities to prioritize family ties over skills, but the 1990 law exacerbated this flaw. The policy has resulted in a record 51 million immigrants and 70 million residents who speak a foreign language at home, but we still hear complaints about a lack of skilled immigrants.
The influx of mainly low-skilled immigrants from Third World countries in the second half of the 20th century gave rise to a phenomenon known as “chain migration,” whereby new arrivals shared similar socio-economic backgrounds. It became.
As a result, only about 15% of green cards (1.6 million of the 10.8 million legal permanent residents over the past 10 years) have been issued based on the following conditions: Any skill. Most of these do not reward extensive skills or assimilation and instead flow through nepotism visa programs.
After all, most “skills” visas do not apply to immigrants with exceptional talent. Instead, the H-1B lottery, led by India's Body Shop, involves ordinary computer workers and accountants, many of whom are from upper castes in southern India. Of the millions of immigrant and long-term nonimmigrant visas issued each year, only 10,000 to 20,000 are O-1 visas for “exceptional” talent.
Every year,
huge flow 1.5 million international students, the majority from India and China, enter the United States, entering H-1B and L visas and optional and curricular training programs created by executives who steal jobs from Americans. There is. Let's abolish chain immigration, get international student numbers back to the historical norm of hundreds of thousands, and then let's talk about high-skill visas. At that point, we negotiate from a stronger position, having lowered our overall numbers and achieved voter consensus.
We must ultimately put American culture and American workers first. of
Most of the people agree that immigration should be limited to people with unique skills; Newcomers must absorb American values and adopt English. At the end of the day, immigration policy must benefit all Americans, not just corporations and the D.C. cartel.
That's why we need to abolish H-1Bs and the random visa lottery. It should also abolish most employment-based visas, except for workers in multinational companies operating under clear restrictions. Many people confuse employment-based visas with skill-based visas, but in recent years employers have used these visas to artificially lower white-collar salaries, which means illegal immigrants are less skilled It reflects how we are undercutting workers' wages.
We should move to a points system that prioritizes individuals who benefit the broader population, rather than individuals brought in for the benefit of a single company. Since the Immigration Act of 1891, the United States has sought to move away from contract labor immigration.
Section 3 The law made it a crime to “aid or encourage the importation or immigration of foreigners by promising employment through advertisements printed or published in foreign countries.'' Previous generations naturally distrusted the special interests and industries that shape immigration policy.
This principle goes back to the RAISE Act. The original version established a points system based on age, education, English proficiency and income, the opposite of the current H-1B system, which encourages companies to lower wages. Although the details can be debated, the framework of the RAISE Act provides a solid starting point.
A points system would likely diversify the annual immigrant population, rather than continuing decades of domination by Mexico, other Latin American and Caribbean countries, India and China.
Before you think about how many new immigrants you want under a points system, you need to eliminate about 500,000 green cards, eliminate 500,000 to 1 million F student visas (and replace J-1 exchange student visas). reforms) and hundreds of thousands of other worker visas should be abolished. , and even their families. The system cannot be extended or modified. First, we need to dismantle our broken system and address the illegal immigration Biden has allowed. No more “I'll happily pay you on Tuesday for today's burger.”
Will special interests drown out the silent majority again? Americans overwhelmingly oppose increased immigration. recent
Gallup poll It found that 55% of Americans, including 88% of Republicans, want to lower the standards, while 25% support keeping the status quo and just 16% support raising them. . This position is supported by bipartisan elites.
The opposition becomes even stronger when we look at the actual numbers. 2018
Harvard University and Harris University Poll Without disclosing current immigration numbers, it posed an open-ended question: “How many legal immigrants should the United States admit each year?” Only 19% chose 1 million or more, and 18% chose 500,000 to 1 million. Another 19% selected 250,000 to 499,999, and 35% selected 100,000 to 250,000, including 48% of Black respondents, making up the largest share.
In other words, few Americans want to raise the current level, and a clear majority supports a lower level than the RAISE Act. That stance makes sense.
In 1965, when the Hart-Celler Act was being debated, the United States issued just 296,700 green cards. Attorney General Nicholas Katzenbach argued that the law would only increase net immigration by about 60,000 people a year. Rather, it increased by about 300,000 people each year until a 1990 law pushed that number to over 1.1 million, where it remained for 34 years.
After a small “Great Wave” from 1880 to 1920, we effectively cut off large-scale immigration until after World War II. For about 20 years after the war, the annual cumulative number remained in the hundreds of thousands. Aristide Solberg, a leading expert on recent immigration history, explains in his academic book “A Nation by Design'' why in every immigration debate since 1965, the public has wanted calm, but lawmakers have asked if he had gone in the opposite direction. He cited other observers who noted that while there was widespread support for reducing legal immigration, it was not well organized. Meanwhile, a liberal coalition of ethnic groups, churches and employers' associations formed a powerful bloc opposing any proposed restrictions.
Today, 60 years after the Hart-Celler Act and nine years after President Trump's first pledge to curb immigration, the president-elect and Elon Musk are fulfilling the role of “force multiplier” they have been absent for 60 years. I swore. “Vox Populi!” they proclaimed. Now is the time to deliver on that promise, which will help address future disagreements over highly skilled visas. This time, American citizens come first, immigrants later.
