Thread: Competitiveness Can't Compete With Politics

I am posting this along with the comments from the person that sent it to me. This is what politicians love to do. They can't get a bill passed to they change the name of the bill and try and pass it! Watch out for the Skill Bill!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Check out his site http://www.jobdestruction.com/


A new LA Times article is written from the perspective of CEOs and never
considers other viewpoints. This excerpt makes it very clear that an
increase of H-1B visas is a top priority for high-tech companies.

The two main priorities for the high-tech industry were an
increase in the annual number of H-1B visas for highly skilled
workers from abroad and a permanent extension and expansion of
the R&D tax credit.

The reporter is quite clueless about what is going on in Congress. He
thinks that the only bill in Congress that will increase H-1B is the Senate
Comprehensive Immigration Bill (S. 2611). He is correct that S2611 is
probably on its deathbed but he fails to mention the Skil bill which is
very much alive in both the House and the Senate -- and it contains the
same H-1B increase. It's sort of odd that the Skill bill is never mentioned
especially considering how many shills the reporter talked to. Could it be
intentional obscuration?

Heavy hitters in high-tech industries haven't given up hope of getting an
H-1B increase. Their stern warning to Congress to do something should be
taken very seriously.

"We appreciate the broad bipartisan, bicameral commitment -- but
we believe the time for words has passed," the CEO Council ---
which includes Mark Hurd of Hewlett-Packard Co. and Paul Otellini
of Intel Corp. --- wrote to congressional leaders last week.
"It's time to act."

It's worth noting that the statement above was made by representatives of
Intel and HP. Both companies have announced major staff reductions while at
the same time calling for a bipartisan H-1B increase. Of course the
reporter missed the irony of this. Sometimes I have to wonder if reporters
and the editors actually read what they write, or if they are so ignorant
of the industry they didn't catch this one.


If the cheap labor lobby loses this this year, they will be back next year.
Preventing this from happening will be an ongoing battle.

"We're sorry that some of the important provisions got tied up in
much more controversial issues," said White House science advisor
John H. Marburger III. "We can't just give up after a year. The
stakes are sufficiently high to view this as a multiyear campaign."


++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ +

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-c ... ry?coll=la
-headlines-business

Competitiveness Can't Compete With Politics

A White House initiative to bolster the high-tech industry gets waylaid by
legislative maneuvering.
By Jim Puzzanghera
Times Staff Writer

September 18, 2006

WASHINGTON - To Silicon Valley engineers, the physics of politics is a
strange science in which the momentum of a plan to make high-tech companies
more competitive is halted by seemingly unrelated debates over the estate
tax and illegal immigration.

President Bush unveiled the so-called American Competitiveness Initiative
during his State of the Union address in January. Since then, though, the
ambitious plan with bipartisan support has been stalled by election-year
politics.

The initiative is a top priority for high-tech executives alarmed by the
bumper crops of engineers and scientists produced in China and India. After
pressing since 2004 for legislation to help the United States maintain its
technological dominance, the tech industry thought everything was aligned
for action this year.

"These CEOs aren't Washington guys, and in their minds, when everybody
agrees that something's necessary -- they just can't see why action is so
difficult," said Bruce Mehlman, executive director of the Technology CEO
Council, a public policy association of nine top high-tech chief
executives.

The experience has provided another lesson in Silicon Valley's political
education: how the crosscurrents of a high-stakes election can derail even
broadly popular legislation.

The 10-year, $136-billion plan would combine increased federal science and
education spending with tax breaks for research and easier access to highly
skilled foreigners. Leading lawmakers from both sides of the aisle who had
already made or were drafting similar proposals enthusiastically vowed
their support.

But little of the multifaceted initiative has been approved. And two key
components are on their deathbeds.

A proposal to increase the number of specialized visas for technically
trained foreign workers has been held up by the partisan stalemate over
illegal immigration. Legislation to extend and expand an expired tax credit
for research and development costs was derailed this summer, when
Republican leaders included it in a contentious plan to cut the estate tax.


"We're sorry that some of the important provisions got tied up in much more
controversial issues," said White House science advisor John H. Marburger
III. "We can't just give up after a year. The stakes are sufficiently high
to view this as a multiyear campaign."

Tech executives thought the whole package would be wrapped up in months,
not years, and warned that the United States risked falling behind in the
global economy unless Congress acted quickly.

"We appreciate the broad bipartisan, bicameral commitment -- but we believe
the time for words has passed," the CEO Council --- which includes Mark
Hurd of Hewlett-Packard Co. and Paul Otellini of Intel Corp. --- wrote to
congressional leaders last week. "It's time to act."

There's little time left, though, as lawmakers rush to hit the campaign
trail. Supporters have reconciled themselves to starting over next year.

Lobbyists said the initiative was hindered because its varied components
required approval from several congressional committees, a tall task in a
shortened election-year session.

"It was a multifaceted approach that had so many pieces it was hard to
manage, and it was hard to put one person in charge of managing it," said
Ralph Hellmann, senior vice president for government relations at the
Information Technology Industry Council.

Although Bush has given at least seven speeches on the competitiveness
initiative since unveiling it Jan. 31, "it just didn't get the
highest-level oomph" behind the scenes at the White House and in Congress,
Hellmann said.

Some victories may be coming soon.

The House has passed two 2007 spending bills that included research funding
called for in Bush's initiative, including a $439-million boost for the
National Science Foundation. The Senate is trying to finish work on its
version of the bills, which also fully pay for Bush's initiative, and they
are expected to be approved by the end of the year.

"We're on the path to get the money, and that's what counts," said House
Science Committee Chairman Sherwood L. Boehlert (R-N.Y.). "We've got more
to do, but thus far, it's going well."

That funding, however, is focused on long-term basic research at
universities. The two main priorities for the high-tech industry were an
increase in the annual number of H-1B visas for highly skilled workers from
abroad and a permanent extension and expansion of the R&D tax credit.

Complaining that there aren't enough top-level U.S. engineers and computer
scientists, the tech industry often looks abroad to fill technical jobs.
Those workers must first obtain special six-year H-1B visas. At the peak of
the dot-com boom, Congress temporarily increased the annual number of those
visas to a high of 195,000.

But in 2004, the limit dropped to 65,000, with an additional 20,000
available to foreigners who earned advanced degrees at U.S. universities.
The tech industry says it needs a lot more. The program is in such demand
that U.S. immigration officials received enough applications to cover the
2007 allotment in May, more than four months before the fiscal year begins.

The Senate immigration reform bill includes an increase in the annual H-1B
limit to 115,000, but the House's immigration bill has no increase. The
broader immigration issue is so contentious that no compromise is expected
this year.

The tax credit, which saves U.S. companies about $7 billion a year by
offsetting about 6% of their research and development expenses, expired on
Dec. 31. Bush's initiative called for a permanent extension and expansion
of the credit, at a cost of $86 billion over 10 years.

Permanence is off the table for now. The tech industry is scrambling simply
to get the credit reinstated for two years, which is expected to happen by
the end of the year. A short-term extension of the tax credit is popular
with both Republicans and Democrats, but that allowed it to be used as a
political bargaining chip this summer.

GOP congressional leaders removed it from a bill headed for passage and
attached it to another that contained a controversial cut in the estate
tax, hoping the tax credit would lure support.

That bill didn't pass the Senate. The maneuver infuriated high-tech
executives and Democrats backing competitiveness legislation.

"It's not unreasonable to say that when you're in charge of the White
House, the House and the Senate, that you produce the things you promise to
produce," Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-San Jose), who helped craft the House
Democrats' competitiveness plan in the fall, said of Republicans.

"All they want to do is talk about it. They don't really want to do
anything."

Sen. John Ensign (R-Nev.) hasn't thrown in the towel.

He's been working to combine all the components of Bush's initiative and
other legislation addressing the issue into one bill that could move
through Congress more easily. Ensign thinks there's still enough time to
get his last-ditch attempt passed this year.

"I'm hoping," he said, "it doesn't get caught up in election-year
politics."

Tech executives thought the whole package would be wrapped up in months, not years, and warned that the United States risked falling behind in the global economy unless Congress acted quickly.

"risked falling behind in the global economy"

Would that mean hiring our workers, making our stuff, then buying our stuff?

YIPPEE!!

Altogether now in Unison:

"Lets fall behind in the global economy,

Lets hire our workers loyally,

Lets make our stuff efficiently,

Lets purchase our products totally,

Lets fall behind in the global economy,

Iimmediately."

USA! USA! USA!

HooRah!

Originally Posted by Judy

Tech executives thought the whole package would be wrapped up in months, not years, and warned that the United States risked falling behind in the global economy unless Congress acted quickly.

"risked falling behind in the global economy"

Would that mean hiring our workers, making our stuff, then buying our stuff?

YIPPEE!!

Altogether now in Unison:

"Lets fall behind in the global economy,

Lets hire our workers loyally,

Lets make our stuff efficiently,

Lets purchase our products totally,

Lets fall behind in the global economy,

Iimmediately."

USA! USA! USA!

HooRah!