To: H-1B/L-1/offshoring e-newsletter Wed Feb 20 12:01:59 PST 2013 I've often written that the industry lobbyists are incorrect in their claims that the foreign tech workers, especially those graduating as foreign students at U.S. universities, are "the best and the brightest." Some are indeed brilliant, but most are ordinary people doing ordinary work. I've always strongly backed facilitating the immigration of those who really are the best and the brightest. In particular, some of you may recall that I've proposed giving quick green cards to any foreign STEM student who gets a legitimate job offer at the 90th percentile of the given occupation in the given region. (And I do mean "quick," in contrast to the proposals in Congress, which would continue to result in handcuffed workers.) That of course is starkly different from the proposals in Congress, which would grant "STEM visas" to ALL foreign grad students in STEM. As I've shown, the average quality of the foreign grad students is no higher than, and in various senses lower than, that of the Americans. So it just makes no sense to grant special status to the entire group. Compare that to China and Intel. Acccording to a story in today's Washington Post, China has a special program to attract Chinese expatriates (many of whom studied in the U.S. and are now working here) to return. Of the 5,600 applicants, only 1,000 or so have been accepted. In other words, the Chinese policy is SELECTIVE. What does the Chinese government know that our government (at least claims) not to know? Meanwhile Intel has a fellowship program for (domestic) PhD students, http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/education/university/intel-phd-fellowship -provisions.html Intel actually doesn't hire many PhDs, but my point here is this: The fellowships are available only to students at SELECTED universities. What does Intel know that the U.S. Congress doesn't know? The Post article, at http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/other-countries-court-skilled-immigrants-frustrated-by-us-visa-laws/2013/02/18/73d9f7ce-7137-11e2-ac36-3d8d9dcaa2e2_story.html seems to be supportive of the proposals in Congress, but it highlights two post docs at MIT. Being at MIT, they would qualify as the best and the brightest in anyone's book. But does that mean we should give special visas to Master's students at San Jose State? Norm