Cornyn Withdraws SKIL Amendment
Cornyn Withdraws SKIL Amendment
Date: Wednesday, April 25, 2007 9:55 PM
<<<<< JOB DESTRUCTION NEWSLETTER No. 1681 -- 4/25/2007 >>>>>
Good news! Sen. Cornyn (R-TX) withdrew his amendment (SA 902) to tack the
SKIL bill onto Reid's so-called innovation bill (S 761). Cornyn's statement
in the Congressional Record reminds me of the movie "Terminator" when
Arnold Schwarzenegger proclaims, "I'LL BE BACK":
We are back again. I assure my colleagues that we will be coming
back time and time again until we get this matter voted on.
It's sort of funny that Cornyn is acting like the Terminator, but what he
said should be taken very seriously. He vowed to continue to push the SKIL
at that is not good news for us. If he gets his way he will earn a new name
-- "The Job Terminator"!
Cornyn wasn't the only one that was plotting this betrayal of American
high-tech workers. He had bipartisan cohorts that were given due thanks:
First, I express my gratitude to both Senator BINGAMAN (D-NM)
and Senator ALEXANDER (R-TN) for their leadership on this
issue.
<<<<< Cornyn Quiz >>>>>
And now to see if you have been paying attention, let's have a multiple
choice quiz by Sen. John Cornyn:
Mr. CORNYN:
In this global economy, there are only three ways for us to retain
the most brilliant workforce in the world:
No. 1, we can grow our own talent, which is the intent of the bill
we are debating right now;
No. 2, we can continue to recruit the top students from around the
world from other nations; or,
No. 3, we can watch our companies move their workforce and jobs to
other countries in order to find that talented workforce and to
remain competitive.
The question is: Which one of these scenarios is most likely if the SKIL
bill becomes law.
Choose the best answer. Your choices are:
1
2
3
1 and 2
1 and 3
2 and 3
All of the Above
None of the Above
To prevent you from cheating, I provided the answer at the bottom of this
newsletter.
<<<<< End of Cornyn Quiz >>>>>
Sen. Cornyn is very worried that foreign students who graduate from our
universities won't be able to get jobs. I read the transcript several times
and yet couldn't find a single bit of concern that American students might
have a tough time finding jobs. It's rather obvious that Cornyn simply
doesn't give a damn about American students.
Mr. CORNYN
That is right, because the United States has already met the cap for
H-1B visas, foreign students graduating from our universities this
spring are virtually shut out of the U.S. job market.
A statement by Sen. Alexander should catch everybody's attention and not
only because he voices support for the SKIL bill. He gives a deadline for
passing it!
Mr. ALEXANDER
It is my hope that this is not the end of that discussion. I
strongly agree with him. Our immigration laws are archaic in this
regard. We have 650,000 legal new citizens every year, and we
should, in our own interests, allow highly skilled men and
women - the brightest people in the world who come here to study,
earn these degrees in science, technology, math - to stay
here and create jobs instead of going home and creating jobs. We
should do that. So he has highlighted that. The Senate adopted
that last year. I hope we will have a chance to adopt it again
before Memorial Day.
By now you are probably wondering why Cornyn withdrew the bill. He doesn't
come right out and say it, but by reading between the lines we can deduce
what happened.
Mr. CORNYN.
But I understand the practical ramifications of
continuing to insist upon a vote on this particular amendment
at this time.
Alexander gave another clue:
Mr. ALEXANDER.
Mr. President, within 3 or 4 minutes, we will be
moving to amendments as described by the Senator from New Mexico.
But before he speaks, let me thank the Senator from Texas both
for his leadership on the amendment and for his spirit of
cooperation and willingness to withdraw the amendment.
Here is my take on what this means -- The Senators told Cornyn that his
amendment would hold Reid's bill up. They told Cornyn to be a "team player"
and withdraw the bill. As part of the deal they will return the favor to
Cornyn very soon and work to pass his pet project.
There can be only one reason the Senators feared that the Cornyn bill would
hold up things -- it's because American citizens have voiced their anger
over guest worker visas like H-1B. Congress critters are starting to
realize that it's going to be difficult to pass an H-1B increase because
Americans are starting to revolt against the plutocrats.
Despite growing corporate control of our government the buck stops at the
voting booth!
Folks, this may only be a temporary victory but it truly is a win for the
grass roots activists that keep phone calling, sending faxes, and visiting
Congressional offices. I hope this encourages more of you to join the
battle because this should give you some hope that we can win!
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
NOTE: This is an excerpt from the Congressional Record. I decided not to
include the entire text about Reid's bill since mostly the Senators just
talk about how stupid, lazy, and uneducated Americans are. You can't learn
much from their malicious diatribes except for how much they hate this
country.
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getpage.cgi?position=all&page=s4893&dbname=2007_record
S4893
April 24, 2007
AMENDMENT NO. 902 (Purpose: To amend the Immigration and
Nationality Act to increase competitiveness in the United States) Mr.
CORNYN. Mr. President, I have an amendment at the desk. I ask unanimous
consent to set aside the pending amendment, call up amendment 902, and
ask for its immediate consideration. The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore.
Without objection, it is so ordered. The clerk will report. The assistant
legislative clerk read as follows: The Senator from Texas [Mr. CORNYN]
proposes an amendment numbered 902. Mr. CORNYN. I ask unanimous consent
that reading of the amendment be dispensed with.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so ordered.
(The text of the amendment is printed in today's RECORD under ''Text of
Amendments.'') Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, as I told the distinguished
Senator from New Mexico and the distinguished Senator from Tennessee, it
is my intention to withdraw this amendment following my remarks. But I
believe it is important, when we are talking about America's
competitiveness, to talk about people with some of the very most desirable
skills and education and how it is that we might attract them to live
and work and create jobs here in America. First, I express my gratitude to
both Senator BINGAMAN and Senator ALEXANDER for their leadership on this
issue. It is not often enough that we have an opportunity to work on a
bipartisan basis on something that is so right and so good and so
meritorious as this. It feels good. I think we ought to do it more often.
I do wish to talk about this amendment which is called the Securing
Knowledge, Innovation, and Leadership Act amendment, otherwise known as
the SKIL bill. This was a component of the comprehensive immigration
reform bill that passed the Senate last year. Of course, that did not go
anywhere. We are back again. I assure my colleagues that we will be
coming back time and time again until we get this matter voted on. In
the past 2 years, there has been much focus by Congress and the
administration on restoring America's competitive edge. While some have
viewed the SKIL bill, as it is called, as an immigration issue, I believe
it should be considered as a competitiveness issue, not just an
immigration one. In fact, the National Academy of Sciences included
similar recommendations in its study ''Rising Above the Gathering
Storm.'' This very report was the original, the genesis of America
COMPETES and several other bills introduced in the 109th Congress. That
report recommended to Congress that it should ''continue to improve visa
processing for international students and scholars to provide less
complex procedures and continue to make improvements on such issues as
visa categories and duration, travel for scientific meetings, the
technology-alert list, reciprocity agreements, and changes in status.''
The report also recommended that Congress should ''institute a new
skills-based, preferential immigration option. Doctoral-level education in
science and engineering skills would substantially raise an applicant's
chances and priority in obtaining U.S. citizenship'' under this particular
legislation. The United States has always been blessed by recruiting the
best and the brightest from all around the world, whether they be
scholars, scientists, or researchers. As we all know, the United
States is now engaged, though, in a global competition for these very
same scientists, scholars, and researchers. In this global economy, there
are only three ways for us to retain the most brilliant workforce in the
world: No. 1, we can grow our own talent, which is the intent of the bill
we are debating right now; No. 2, we can continue to recruit the top
students from around the world from other nations; or, No. 3, we can
watch our companies move their workforce and jobs to other countries in
order to find that talented workforce and to remain competitive. I don't
know if there are any other choices than those-grow our own talent,
import the best talent, or see our jobs go overseas. Those are the choices
we have. The countries that can attract and retain the best and the
brightest will obviously have an advantage over other countries in this
global competition. As we have heard, the United States does not produce
enough engineers. Over half of master's and Ph.D. degrees in the United
States go to foreign students each year, foreign students who study in
the United States. China graduates four times as many engineers as we do,
and within a few years approximately 90 percent of all scientists and
engineers in the world will be in Asia. Foreign students help us fill the
gap right now-a gap we are going to try to make up through growing more
of our own talent right here through the great provisions of this
legislation- but then our immigration policy, as currently constituted,
forces these best and brightest students, these foreign students, to
return home because there are no high-tech visas. Our immigration policy
has not adapted to the changing international environment or this global
competition. Only 65,000 visas are issued each year to this category of
the best and the brightest. For the past few years, the cap has been
reached before the fiscal year even begins. But this year, on April 1,
2007, there was a loud outcry for immediate relief in our highly skilled
immigration policies because that was the day the U.S. Citizenship and
Immigration Service announced the 2008 cap for H-1B visas was met. That
is right, because the United States has already met the cap for H- 1B
visas, foreign students graduating from our universities this spring are
virtually shut out of the U.S. job market. We hit that cap on the very day
the opportunity for filing for those types of visas was presented. This
situation is unprecedented. What it means is employers cannot hire highly
educated workers for up to 1 year, until the next allotment of visas
becomes available. With global competition, of course, these workers have
a lot of other options as to where to go. They can go to England. They
can go to France. They can go to India. They can go to China. In short,
they can go to our global competitors and work there and take the jobs
that
could be created here in America with them. This SKIL bill has
important protections for American workers, and I hope my colleagues will
listen to this because there is, frankly, a lot of misconception about
foreign students and foreign workers coming here and taking American jobs
at a lower wage. In fact, high-tech visas generate fees to pay for U.S.
worker training programs. Every time an employer sponsors a foreign
worker, that employer must contribute to a fund to train U.S. workers. Of
course, under our law, they cannot be hired to come in and work at a
lower wage than would have to be paid to a comparable U.S. worker.
Immigrant professionals actually create jobs here in the United States.
The founder of Intel is a prime example. He was an immigrant from Hungary
and has created hundreds of thousands of jobs at his company here in
America. So sound policy will start by retaining foreign students who are
educated here in the United States, particularly in the most sought after
areas of math, science, and engineering. We should exempt from the annual
visa limit any foreign student who graduates from a U.S. university with
a master's degree or a Ph.D. degree in these essential fields. It is
simply a matter of economic survival and competition for the United
States. Also, insourcing talented workers, as I pointed out, is
preferable to outsourcing those jobs and the associated economic activity
that goes with it to other countries. We should make it easier for those
who do comply with our immigration laws to travel in and out of our
country as well. We must also attract the best and brightest who are
working in other countries to come here and do their work in the United
States so those jobs can stay here. In the long run, we have to improve
our schools and encourage more U.S. students to study engineering and
mathematics, and the America COMPETES Act, as it is currently written,
does just that. But in the short term, we have to adapt our immigration
policy so when those U.S. students are educated in engineering fields,
there will be jobs right here in the United States for them to perform.
Then we can reap the benefits of the most outstanding college and
university education in the world, which students travel from all around
the world in order to be able to obtain, and then that they not have to
go home after they graduate from college if they are in the essential
fields of math, science, and engineering. If we do not act, America's
technology industry, its health care industry, higher education, research
institutions, financial services industries will be harmed and our
economy will suffer. The intersection of our immigration policy and our
country's ability to compete for global talent is critical, and we cannot
wait years to address this issue. It is imperative we address it as soon
as possible.
My only regret is we are unable to do so on this bill because it belongs
on this bill. But I understand the practical ramifications of continuing
to insist upon a vote on this particular amendment at this time. So it is
with some regret that I ask unanimous consent to withdraw my amendment
but urge my colleagues to continue to work to support H-1B visa reform
and see that the SKIL bill, as currently presented as an amendment to
this bill, is ultimately enacted into law because, frankly, it is in the
best interest of the United States and American jobs right here at home.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. SALAZAR). Without objection, the amendment
from the Senator from Texas is withdrawn. Mr. CORNYN. I yield the floor.
Yhe PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Tennessee. Mr. ALEXANDER. Mr.
President, within 3 or 4 minutes, we will be moving to amendments as
described by the Senator from New Mexico. But before he speaks, let me
thank the Senator from Texas both for his leadership on the amendment and
for his spirit of cooperation and willingness to withdraw the amendment.
It is my hope that this is not the end of that discussion. I strongly
agree with him. Our immigration laws are archaic in this regard. We have
650,000 legal new citizens every year, and we should, in our own
interests, allow highly skilled men and women-the brightest people in the
world who come here to study, earn these degrees in science, technology,
math-to stay here and create jobs instead of going home and creating
jobs. We should do that. So he has highlighted that. The Senate adopted
that last year. I hope we will have a chance to adopt it again before
Memorial Day. I salute the Senator for that, and I hope this is just the
beginning of his insistence on this and other types of legislation that
would reform our immigration policy. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator
from New Mexico. Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, let me also commend the
Senator from Texas and thank him for his support for the underlying
legislation. I do think the substance of what he is trying to get
accomplished with regard to the immigration laws of the country- I very
much support trying to facilitate allowing people who get an education
here to stay here and use those talents and skills and knowledge they
have acquired to benefit our country. So we need to work on that. I think
the appropriate place to do that is as part of the debate we will do on
immigration, which is coming up. The majority leader has indicated he
plans to get to that issue in May, so I think, clearly, that is coming up
very soon. But I commend the Senator from Texas for his willingness to
withdraw his amendment at this time. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The senior
Senator from New Mexico.
Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I am not going to take any time. In fact, I
just want to do something I very rarely do, but it seems appropriate
based on the arguments I have made this day. So I am going to ask for a
parliamentary inquiry of the Chair. My parliamentary inquiry is, would
this bill, with any of the amendments that have been adopted so far, be
subject to a point of order under the Budget Act of the United States?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair is not aware of any such points of order
against this bill. Mr. DOMENICI. I thank the Chair. I yield the floor.
Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum. The
PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll. The assistant
legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll. Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr.
President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be
rescinded. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
AMENDMENT NO. 908, AS MODIFIED Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I send a
modification to amendment No. 908 to the desk. The PRESIDING OFFICER.
Without objection, the amendment is so modified. The amendment, as
modified, is as follows: On page 55, lines 21 and 22, strike
''engineering)'' and insert ''engineering and technology)''. On page 56,
line 8, after ''engineering'' insert ''and technology''. On page 56, line
24, strike ''mathematics and science'' and insert ''mathematics, science,
engineering, and technology''. On page 59, line 6, strike ''mathematics
and science'' and insert ''mathematics, science, and, to the extent
applicable, technology and engineering''. On page 59, line 15, strike
''mathematics and science'' and insert ''mathematics, science,
technology, and engineering''. On page 60, line 6, strike ''mathematics
and science'' and insert ''mathematics, science, technology, and
engineering''. On page 60, line 10, before ''that'' insert ''in
mathematics, science, and to the extent applicable, technology and
engineering''. On page 60, line 24, strike ''mathematics and science''
and insert ''mathematics, science, and to the extent applicable,
technology and engineering''. On page 61, lines 8 and 9, strike
''mathematics and science'' and insert ''mathematics, science, and, to
the extent applicable, technology and engineering''. On page 62, line 14,
strike ''mathematics or science'' and insert ''mathematics, science,
technology, or engineering''. On page 65, lines 16 and 17, strike
''MATHEMATICS AND SCIENCE'' and insert ''MATHEMATICS, SCIENCE,
TECHNOLOGY, AND ENGINEERING''. On page 65, line 19, strike ''MATHEMATICS
AND SCIENCE'' and insert ''MATHEMATICS, SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY, AND
ENGINEERING''. On page 66, lines 8 and 9, strike ''Mathematics and
Science'' and insert ''Mathematics, Science, Technology, and
Engineering''. On page 67, line 9, strike ''Mathematics and Science'' and
insert ''Mathematics, Science, Technology, and Engineering''.
Answer to Cornyn Quiz
In this global economy, there are only three ways for us to retain
the most brilliant workforce in the world:
No. 1, we can grow our own talent, which is the intent of the bill
we are debating right now;
No. 2, we can continue to recruit the top students from around the
world from other nations; or,
No. 3, we can watch our companies move their workforce and jobs to
other countries in order to find that talented workforce and to
remain competitive.
The question is: Which one of these scenarios is most likely if the SKIL
bill becomes law.
Choose the best answer. Your choices are:
1
2
3
1 and 2
1 and 3
2 and 3
All of the Above
None of the Above
THE ANSWER IS: #3
Let me explain why #3 is the correct answer.
#1 - The SKIL bill is antithetical to growing our own talent. That's
because people need incentives to get into computer IT, engineering, and
science. The SKIL bill takes away the incentive of our best and brightest
to embark on difficult technical careers because it destroys their jobs and
takes away their opportunities.
#2 - The SKIL Bill does nothing to change the fact than many of the foreign
students that attend our universities are top students. Conversely there is
nothing in the SKIL bill that prevents the dumb and dumbest foreign
students from coming here either. When Cornyn says "recruit" he is using a
code word for bringing foreign students into the U.S. and giving them our
jobs. If Cornyn truly wanted to give the best and the brightest students in
the world our jobs, he would do more to help American students! Ironically
once the SKIL Bill terminates most of the good jobs in the U.S. the best
foreign students will probably choose to go to school in a country that
offers them better opportunities - like India or China.
#3 -- As I have explained many times, importing foreign workers facilitates
outsourcing. If the SKIL bill is passed it will accomplish exactly what
Cornyn implies he doesn't want to do -- export our jobs overseas. Our
companies will use foreign students and H-1B/L-1 visa holders to
accerlerate the knowledge transfer that's necessary to offshore jobs.
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