stupidest idea of 2008 -- so far
stupidest idea of 2008 -- so far
Date: Friday, January 04, 2008 1:25 AM
<<<<< JOB DESTRUCTION NEWSLETTER No. 1807 -- 1/04/2008 >>>>>
I was just waiting for somebody to come up with the first stupid idea of 2008.
The prize goes to: Ms. Furchtgott-Roth who was a former chief economist at the
U.S. Department of Labor and is currently a senior fellow at the Hudson
Institute.
Roth's idea in a nutshell is to give the Labor Department the authority to
determine the national demand for foreign labor, and to adjust immigration
levels accordingly.
So, is her idea truly stupid? Well, it depends on what side of the fence you
stand on. In my opinion anytime you subvert the Constitution and destroy
American jobs, it's stupid. Let's examine what she wants to do from both sides
of the fence:
#1 The Stupid Side of the Fence -- Allowing the Dept. of Labor to determine
the number of H-1B visas to be issued is probably unconstitutional because
Congress is supposed to set immigration policy. Assuming the Secretary of
Labor could be given the power to set visa limits, it's a bad idea at least
for American workers. Take our current Labor Secretary Elaine Chao as an
example -- she has said many times that she thinks H-1B should have no limits.
Under Bill Clinton Secretary Robert Reich was no better.
Considering every major presidential candidate has voiced support for
increasing the H-1B cap, the odds are very poor that the next Labor Secretary
would hold the line on H-1B.
#2 The Smart Side of the Fence -- Allowing the Dept. of Labor to determine the
number of H-1B visas to be issued takes away Constitutional authority from
Congress and gives it to the President, who appoints the Labor Secretary. If
your purpose is to get as many H-1B visas as the market wants it's much easier
to influence one person like the Labor Secretary than an entire Congress who
has to deal with angry unemployed workers. Assuming that the federal courts
wouldn't shoot down Roth's plan, this would be an ideal way for Congress to
wash their hands of the H-1B issue. It would also be a smart PR move, since
many people are gullible enough to think that the DOL cares about the welfare
of US workers.
This isn't the first time Furchtgott-Roth has written dumb things -- she has
done even worse. Check out this contradiction from one of her papers for the
Hudson Institute. At one point she says that increasing immigration is
necessary to force wages down (she used the code word "ameliorate"), and then
several paragraphs later she says that immigrants raise the wages of
Americans. This is such a blatant logical error it's quite shocking that an
organization like the Hudson Institute signed their name to her paper.
Apprently the Hudson Institute doesn't proof-read stuff before they put it
online. Tsk!Tsk!
And earlier this week, unit labor costs jumped at an annual rate
of 6.6% in the fourth quarter, adding to pressures in certain
occupations that more immigrants would ameliorate.
Most economic studies show that in the long run, immigrants don't
lower Americans' wages, they raise them.
Oh, and of course she uses a coded form of the old clichi "jobs Americans
don't want". She broadens it to include jobs that require lower or higher
skills. Hmmmmmm, don't you just wonder what jobs are left if low and high
skilled jobs are taken out of the equation? If Roth were honest she would just
come clean and say that she thinks Americans don't want jobs any jobs --
whether it's picking fruit or getting PhDs!
most immigrants have either lower or higher skills than native-born
workers and are not competing for the same kinds of jobs. Most
Americans don't want to pick fruit in California or get PhDs in science.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
http://www.nysun.com/article/68799
January 2, 2008
Desperately Seeking Visas
BY DIANA FURCHTGOTT-ROTH
January 2, 2008
Even as words fly fast and furious before tomorrow's Iowa caucuses, no federal
immigration reform law is likely to be enacted in the politically charged
atmosphere of 2008, a presidential election year.
This failure will make a difference to the economy, America's future
technological capacity, and to millions of people -- employers and foreigners
who want to fill vacant jobs here.
With some states, notably Arizona, legislating immigration requirements of
their own, a state-by-state patchwork of disparate rules may be unfolding.
If congress cannot pass major legislation that would address all immigration
issues, including how to treat the 12 million undocumented foreigners living
here now, it could improve the functioning of American labor markets with a
much narrower action. It could authorize the Department of Labor to decide on
its own the number of work permits and temporary visas to be issued every
calendar quarter.
American businesses regularly want to hire more workers than the domestic
labor market supplies. The Labor Department annually issues thousands of
certificates for foreign workers who seek to fill the gap. A small fraction of
these workers actually receive visas, because congressional immigration quotas
restrict the number of foreign workers -- both permanent and temporary -- that
may enter the country.
Employment-based immigration now faces a federal cap. Although the Labor
Department determines national demand for foreign labor, the U.S.
citizenship and Immigration Services (UScIS) is required to admit workers
according to a legislated quota determined by congress.
Every year, UScIS issues 65,000 H-1b temporary visas for skilled workers
certified by the Labor Department out of approximately 630,000 approved
applications from employers, with applications showing no sign of abating.
Immigrants who hold H-1b visas must return to their home countries when the
job ends.
A similar backlog exists for permanent residence visas sought by individuals
both in America and abroad, with applications often close to ten times the
number of "green cards" that may be issued. In 2006, more than 12,000 newly-
arrived workers received green cards to work in the United States, and 53,000
temporary workers already in America were granted green cards.
Foreign workers must be awarded labor certification from the Labor Department.
This process requires the prospective employer to affirm that he has
determined that no American workers are available to fill the position, and
that the foreign worker will be paid the prevailing wage.
Granted both to temporary workers seeking permanent status and new arrivals,
permanent labor certification is one of many prerequisites for employment-
based green card applications.
Temporary labor demand, seen through H-1b visa applications, has been sharply
increasing. For fiscal year 2008, the visa cap of 65,000 was reached in one
day. This is not to say H-1b visas have always been in unmatchable demand.
During the 1990s, congress temporarily raised the quota to 195,000, a number
that did not exceed demand, but the quota reverted to 65,000 in 2004.
This figure represents a miniscule portion of the U.S. labor force of 154
million. Even if the quota were raised to 150,000 annually, that would be less
than one tenth of 1% of the labor force. A higher quota would still block
admission to the vast majority of applicants who are discouraged from applying
due to the small likelihood of success.
Because the Labor Department is ideally positioned to judge employer demand
for foreign labor, Congress should let it make quarterly decisions about how
many visas and green cards to issue.
Whereas Congress is ill-suited to change laws each time the economy goes up or
down, the Labor Department has both the expertise to evaluate a change in the
economy and the ability to react accordingly. Concerns regarding unskilled
(even temporary) labor depressing the labor market could easily be addressed
by requiring the Department to determine the number of unskilled temporary,
seasonal, or other visas issued.
Previous congressional attempts to revise the numbers of immigrants allowed to
enter America each year have become entangled with other immigration issues,
so that quotas are rarely changed. If the Labor Department were allowed to
change the number of visas and green cards quarterly for work purposes, it
would be able to roughly match the number demanded, without causing undue
burden on U.S. workers or community facilities, such as schools and hospitals.
Rather, these foreign workers would pay state, federal, and payroll taxes and
would enhance America's fiscal position. Skilled foreign college graduates who
have been studying in America, often at taxpayer expense, are frequently
denied access to American jobs beyond their graduate or doctoral careers, and
must leave.
Immigration is a matter that affects the nation as a whole. It is worrisome,
then, that some states are trying to take the lead, acting when congress fails
to act. Uneven levels of stringency between states encourage the most mobile
businesses to migrate to where they can most easily do business. Less mobile
businesses, such as family farms, suffer.
Without regular changes to immigration quotas that match changes in employer
demand, America will continue to close its borders to workers who would help
the economy grow.
Allowing the Labor Department to adjust legal immigration every quarter to
match U.S. need for foreign labor would help America resolve its current
quagmire over immigration policies. It would allow America to leave behind the
rancor and division over immigration that has plagued 2007, and to set a new
tone for a new year.
Ms. Furchtgott-Roth, former chief economist at the U.S. Department of Labor,
is a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute. She can be reached at
dfr@hudson.org.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
http://www.hudson.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=publication_details&id=4551
Fruits of Immigration ...
March 9, 2007
by Diana Furchtgott-Roth
It's bad news for New York that immigration reform has stalled in Congress.
New York is home to over 2 million foreign-born workers, over a quarter of
the work force. It's second only to California in the percent of
foreign-born workers living within its borders, with New Jersey a close
third. New York's economy relies on immigrant talent, both high-skilled in
research, finance, and innovation, and low-skilled in hotels and
restaurants.
Last November, Senator Reid, then the leader of the Democratic minority in
the Senate, announced plans to consider a comprehensive immigration bill at
the beginning of the new Congress. "I think we have no choice we must
address this most perplexing issue that faces America, it's something that
must be done, it's something we will do," Mr. Reid said.
But it's March, Senator Reid is in his third month as majority leader, and
immigration bills have been absent not only from the floor of the Senate
and the House, but also from the committees. Rumor has it that Senator
Kennedy is drafting legislation, but none has appeared.
This missing legislation shows that governing is harder than it looks.
Democrats swept to victory beholden to groups that have different views on
many issues, immigration included. A broad base of support has advantages,
but it slows down legislation.
The AFL-CIO and Change to Win, two large associations of unions, spent
millions to support Democratic candidates in 2006. But they have dissimilar
views on immigration. The AFL-CIO sees immigrants as lowering members'
wages. Change to Win sees immigrants as potentially bolstering unions'
declining ranks.
Democratic members of Congress are also split on immigration. Rep. John
Conyers of Michigan, chairman of the Judiciary Committee, which controls
immigration legislation in the House, is a founding member of the
Congressional Black Caucus. No immigration reform news appears on the
Judiciary Committee's Web site. Hispanics strongly favor immigration, and
their support will be crucial to Democrats in the future.
While Democrats squabble, the big loser is the economy, which needs more
low- and high-skilled workers. Today's employment data are expected to show
that the American labor market remains tight, with about an additional
100,000 jobs having been created in the last three months and an
unemployment rate below 5%. And earlier this week, unit labor costs jumped
at an annual rate of 6.6% in the fourth quarter, adding to pressures in
certain occupations that more immigrants would ameliorate.
Entrepreneurs complain they can't find enough high-skilled workers.
Microsoft's chairman, Bill Gates, testified on Wednesday before the Senate
Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions. He said that "
America's need for highly skilled workers has never been greater," and
called for an increase in the number of permanent residents, skipping the
bureaucratic H1-B visa process altogether.
Mr. Gates said: "Barring high skilled immigrants from entry to the U.S.,
and forcing the ones that are here to leave because they cannot obtain a
visa, ultimately forces U.S. employers to shift development work and other
critical projects offshore. -- we can retain these research projects in the
United States, by contrast, we can stimulate domestic job and economic
growth."
The economy needs low-skilled workers too. The president of the Rochester
Hotel Association, Bill Gunther, said, "Although the general economy in
Rochester, New York is relatively poor compared to its peer cities in the
United States, finding employees to fill the positions of Room Attendant,
Front Office Clerks, Custodial and Maintenance is extremely difficult, even
with a full medical health care insurance premium."
And last summer, according to the National Agricultural Statistics Service,
worker shortages kept the number of hired workers below that of 2005.
Fields in the Pajaro Valley in Santa Cruz County were abandoned because
farmers couldn't find help. Farmers estimated that between 10% and 20%
fewer workers were available to harvest strawberry, raspberry, and
vegetable crops due to immigration restrictions. Dick Peixoto of Lakeside
Organic Gardens had losses of $200,000, the worst in 31 years. He tore out
about 30 acres of vegetables, and had about 100 acres ruined by weeds.
Most economic studies show that in the long run, immigrants don't lower
Americans' wages, they raise them. According to a study by Professor
Giovanni Peri of the University of California at Davis, forthcoming next
week from the National Bureau of Economic Research, immigrants raised the
wages of most native-born workers in California by 4% over 14 years, with
no change for low-skilled workers and a 7% change for high-skilled workers.
These wage increases are based on changes in the long-run productivity of
the economy. They occur because most immigrants have either lower or higher
skills than native-born workers and are not competing for the same kinds of
jobs. Most Americans don't want to pick fruit in California or get PhDs in
science. With more immigrant talent, American businesses can expand,
creating more jobs for everyone.
Democrats, when they were in the minority, promised to reform immigration,
and criticized Republicans for failing to do so. Now is their chance.
This Op-Ed was featured in The New York Sun edition of March 9, 2007
Diana Furchtgott-Roth is a senior fellow and director of Hudson Institute's
Center for Employment Policy. She is the former chief economist at the U.S.
Department of Labor.
Newsletter Homepage:
http://www.JobDestruction.com/shameh1b/JobDestructionNews.htm
Support this Newsletter and www.JobDestruction.com by donating:
www.zazona.com/Donations.htm
To Be removed from this mailing list, reply to this
email with UNSUbSCRIBE in the subject window
Back to archives