All posts by Stuart Anderson

Stuart Anderson is the author of the book Immigration (Greenwood, 2010) and a researcher on trade and immigration issues. From August 2001 to January 2003, Stuart served as Executive Associate Commissioner for Policy and Planning and Counselor to the Commissioner at the Immigration and Naturalization Service. Before that he spent four and a half years on Capitol Hill on the Senate Immigration Subcommittee, first for Senator Spencer Abraham and then as Staff Director of the subcommittee for Senator Sam Brownback. Stuart has published articles in the Wall Street Journal, New York Times, and other publications. The views expressed in this blog are not intended to support specific pieces of legislation or candidates.

Family Immigration Backlogs Persist

In recent years, much attention has been paid to the long waits for green cards for employer-sponsored immigrants. Many believe such waits harm the competitiveness of U.S. companies, since it makes it more difficult to retain top talent in the United States.

Much less attention has focused on the waits in the family-sponsored immigration categories. The wait times for sponsoring a close family member are long and, in some cases, extremely long. In a November 2010 report, the State Department tabulated more than 4.5 million close relatives of U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents on the immigration waiting list who have registered for processing at a U.S. post overseas. That does not include individuals waiting inside the United States, such as in a temporary visa status, who would gain a green card via adjustment of status at a U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services office. Counting such individuals as well would likely increase the waiting list to over 5 million.

An “immediate relative” of a U.S. citizen can immigrate to America without being subjected to an annual quota. This is important, since it is the relatively low quotas in the family and employer-sponsored preference categories that lead to waits of often many years for would-be immigrants. While there is no numerical limit in the immediate relative category, processing would still normally takes several months. The three primary immediate relatives included in the category are: spouses of U.S. citizens; unmarried children of a U.S. citizen (under 21years old, or under 16 if adopted); and parents of U.S. citizens, if the petitioning citizen is at least 21 years old.

The Preference Categories

Below are the descriptions of the four family-sponsored preferences as detailed in the State Department’s monthly visa bulletin, along with their annual quotas.

“First – Unmarried Sons and Daughters of Citizens: 23,400 a year.

“Second – Spouses and Children, and Unmarried Sons and Daughters of Permanent Residents: 114,200 A. Spouses and Children: 77% of the overall second preference limitation, of which 75% are exempt from the per-country limit; B. Unmarried Sons and Daughters (21 years of age or older): 23% of the overall second preference limitation.

“Third – Married Sons and Daughters of Citizens: 23,400.

“Fourth – Brothers and Sisters of Adult Citizens: 65,000.”

The wait times are longer for U.S. residents sponsoring relatives in Mexico and the Philippines. That is because of the per country limits, which generally limit a country to no more than 7 percent in the preference categories. For example, the wait time for a U.S. citizen petitioning for a brother or sister from the Philippines exceeds 20 years. For siblings from countries other than Mexico and the Philippines the wait times are closer to 10 years. These  estimates are based on examining the visa bulletins and other data from the State Department and U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services.

Wait Times for Sponsoring a Relative in India

The wait times for individuals sponsoring relatives who are in India are estimated to be as follows:

Unmarried Adult Children of U.S. Citizens – 7 year wait.

Spouses and Minor Children of Permanent Residents – 3 year wait.

Spouses and Minor Children of Permanent Residents – 8 year wait.

Married Adult Children of U.S. Citizens – 10 year wait.

Siblings of U.S. Citizens – 11 year wait.

More Visas Needed to Reduce Family Wait Times

To reduce family wait times more immigrant visas would need to be added to the family preference categories. H.R. 3012, which would eliminate the per country limit for employment-based immigrants, would help people from India and China in those categories. However, increasing the per country limit from 7 percent to 15 percent in the family categories, which the bill does, would help those waiting the longest for family members from Mexico and the Philippines. By doing so, it would lead to somewhat longer waits for family-sponsored immigrants from other countries, including India. Other than permanently increasing the number of family-sponsored green cards, something Congress has not done since the current quotas were set in 1990, the long wait times for relatives will likely continue.

Indian-Born Executives Lead New List of Top Immigrant-Founded Companies

New research reveals that many of America’s top companies that have received venture capital have immigrant founders. An impressive group of Indian-born entrepreneurs head the list.

I authored a recently-released study (find it here) that concluded, “Immigrants are increasingly important in driving growth and innovation in America, as evidenced by the role played by foreign-born founders and key personnel in the nation’s breakthrough companies.” The study found, “Immigrants have started nearly half of America’s 50 top venture-funded companies and are key members of management or product development teams in almost 75 percent of our country’s leading cutting-edge companies.”

To conduct the research I interviewed executives and company personnel and gathered information on the top 50 venture-backed companies in the United States. Those 50 companies had been ranked by the firm VentureSource using criteria such as the track record of the management and investors and recent revenue growth.

I found that the companies with at least one immigrant founder averaged about 150 jobs per company in the U.S. Overall, 23 out of 50, or 46 percent of the top venture-funded companies in America had at least one immigrant founder.

The leading source country for immigrant founders was India, followed by Israel, Canada and Iran. There were also immigrant founders on the list from Italy, South Africa, Greece, Norway, Germany, the United Kingdom, Singapore, Switzerland and France.

Here are the companies on the top 50 venture-funded list that had at least one founder born in India:

Aster Data Systems, whose founders include Tasso Argyros (Greece) and Mayank Bawa (India). The company, based in San Carlos, California, employs approximately 100 people. The focus of the company is providing data management, as well as advanced analytics, for employers.

Chegg Inc., based in Santa Clara, California, has become a well-known company for its textbook rental service. It has about 150 employees. Chegg’s founders are Aayush Phumbhra (India) and Osman Rashid (U.K.).

Glam Media, based in Brisbane, California, had 8 founders. Two of the founders were born in India, Samir Arora and Raj Narayan. Following a recent acquisition the company employs about 500 people. Glam works with about 2,500 website partners in the U.S. and Europe. It helps facilitate web advertising in niche and “mid-tail” websites for name brand advertisers.

Umesh Maheshwari and Varun Mehta, both born in India, started Nimble Storage, based in San Jose, California. The company employs 55 people and focuses on disaster-recovery systems, backups and storage.

Suniva, based in Norcross, Georgia, sells solar cells and modules. It was founded by Ajeet Rohatgi, born in India, and employs 190 people.

Xactly, based in San Jose, California, was founded by Christopher Cabrera and Satish Palvai (India). The company sells Internet-based software that can be used for sales compensation. It employs 140 people

Xsigo Systems, also based in San Jose, California, provides equipment and software for the management of datacenters. Employing 110 people, it was started by three brothers born in India, R.K. Anand, Ashok Krishnamurthi, and S.K. Vinod.

“Today’s breakthrough companies are often founded by immigrants or at least employ a foreign-born scientist, engineer or CEO crucial to business growth and product development,” the report noted. “Executives say access to talent from around the world is even more important to companies in their emerging growth phase.”

A key finding of the research is that our country gains when we are open to talented people, without regard to their place of birth. “Policies that help retain talent in the United States are likely to yield both more startup companies and the personnel needed to create more jobs and innovation in America,” the study concluded.

New Research Reveals Benefits of High Skill Immigration

The main argument made against providing more green cards or temporary visas for high skilled immigrants is that it would mean fewer jobs for U.S. workers. Such concern is based on the mistaken impression that there is only a fixed number of jobs and the entry of any newcomer to the labor market must mean bad news for an incumbent jobholder. Of course, that concern does not reflect how a market economy functions.

Now there is new evidence from a respected economist that high skilled foreign nationals create more jobs for Americans. The report from American Enterprise Institute and the Partnership for a New American Economy – a copy of the study can be found here – was conducted by Madeline Zavodny, a professor of economics at Agnes Scott College and former research economist at the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta.

The report carried four main conclusions. First, that immigrants with advanced degrees, particularly in STEM (science, technology, engineering or math) fields create more jobs for U.S.-born workers. According to Zavodny, “The data comparing employment among the fifty states and the District of Columbia show that from 2000 to 2007, an additional 100 foreign-born workers in STEM fields with advanced degrees from U.S. universities is associated with an additional 262 jobs among U.S. natives.”

Second, the study found positive employment benefits from both low skill (H-2B) and high skill (H-1B) temporary visas. “The data show that states with greater numbers of temporary workers in the H-1B program for skilled workers and H-2B program for less-skilled nonagricultural workers had higher employment among U.S. natives. Specifically, adding 100 H-1B workers results in an additional 183 jobs among U.S. natives. Adding 100 H-2B workers results in an additional 464 jobs for U.S. natives,” according to the analysis.

Third, the research addresses concerns that more immigrants entering the labor force hurt U.S. workers. The study concluded, “The analysis yields no evidence that foreign-born workers, taken in the aggregate, hurt U.S. employment.”

Fourth, immigrants with a high education level are major fiscal contributors to the United States. Zavodny writes, “In 2009, the average foreign-born adult with an advanced degree paid over $22,500 in federal, state, and Federal Insurance Contributions Act (FICA, or Social Security and Medicare) taxes, while their families received benefits one-tenth that size through government transfer programs like cash welfare, unemployment benefits, and Medicaid.”

Zavodny believes it’s possible the research underestimated the benefits of high skill immigration. “There are two reasons to think that this study, which uses annual, state-level data over a ten-year period, may actually underestimate the job-creating effects of highly skilled immigrants. First, it does not capture long-run effects if the economy benefits more from immigrants in the long run than in the short run (as suggested by other recent research). Second, it does not capture ‘spillover effects’ if immigrants create jobs in states other than the one where they work (for example, more immigration in California leads businesses to also create new jobs at a subsidiary in Indiana).”

The study was praised by elected officials who favor more liberalized immigration policies. “At a time when job creation should be our highest priority, the study released today casts light on some of the greatest potential areas for growth, at no cost to taxpayers,” said New York City Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg, co-chair of the Partnership for a New American Economy. “It’s time for Washington to restart the conversation on immigration reform – and to center it on our economic needs.”

While the research is not likely to cause critics of immigration to throw up their hands and concede defeat, the study represents important evidence that America and Americans gain from being open to immigrants.

Per Country Limit Bill Continues to Attract Attention

H.R. 3012, “The Fairness to High-Skilled Immigrants Act,” is a small bill, anywhere from 1,000 to 2,000 pages shorter than the bills that normally attract a good deal of media attention. Yet H.R. 3012 continues to attract major editorial and news attention.

The bill, which passed the U.S. House of Representatives 389 to 15, would eliminate the per country limit for employment-based immigrants. That would especially help highly skilled individuals from India and China waiting a long time for green cards. The bill would also raise the per country limit from family-sponsored immigrants from 7 to 15 percent.

The Wall Street Journal editorial page used its powerful voice to call for Senate passage of the bill. “For businesses looking to hire advanced-degree candidates or skilled workers, the end of the cap is a good thing,” argued the editorial. “The 7% solution sought to make the American dream accessible to people from every nation. But today’s reality is that American universities are graduating a high number of foreign-born engineers, computer geeks, scientists, mathematicians and nurses that come from a narrow list of countries. The U.S. will be more prosperous by letting graduates who land jobs stay permanently.” (Find the editorial here, registration may be required.)

But the Wall Street Journal noted the legislation is not the ultimate solution to the employment-based green card problem: “The trouble is that the House bill does nothing to address the real problem: 140,000 green cards a year for advanced-degree and skilled workers is far too few. By refusing to increase the number, or to make a special category of green cards automatically available for American university graduates in science, technology, engineering and math, Congress is again delaying reform that could help the lackluster U.S. economy.”

In an editorial titled “Tinkering at Immigration’s Margins,” the Washington Post also weighed in on the bill, but not as favorably as the Wall Street Journal. “A bill passed by the House of Representatives last month would grant a few thousand more green cards annually to Indian and Chinese engineers, software designers and scientists, mostly at the expense of Korean, Filipino and Mexican engineers, software designers and scientists,” wrote the Washington Post. “Since the legislation makes no overall change in the paltry number of green cards available, hundreds of thousands of highly skilled employees already working in the United States on short-term visas will remain backlogged in the system, in many cases waiting for more than a decade to become legal, permanent residents. That’s what passes for immigration reform in Congress these days.”

Not surprisingly, the legislation has also made news in India. The Economic Times of India took a different tact from its American counterparts, focusing on the impact of current U.S. immigration law on the lives of individuals. (Find article here.) It cited the example of an Indian IT (information technology) specialist who came to the United States in 2003 on an H-1B visa. His employer filed for his green card in 2004 in the third preference and he is still waiting. “He is living in the U.S. under annual extensions of H1B, and every time he leaves the US, he has to apply for advance parole with the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, so that he is not stopped from re-entering,” reports the newspaper. “Kumar doesn’t know when his application for green card will become current.”

The article notes it could take another 10 years or more. “Living in such uncertainty is tough. He had started toying with the idea of giving up the green card dream and returning to India. But that was till last week when the U.S. House of Representatives passed ‘The Fairness to High-Skilled Immigrants Act.’”

As of this writing, H.R. 3012 remains held up in the Senate by Senator Charles Grassley (R-IA). No one can be certain whether he intends simply to slow down the bill, force it through the committee process, or see that it never comes up for a vote.

The Prospects Look Good for Bill to Eliminate Per Country Limit

Legislation that will have a positive direct impact on Indian nationals passed the House of Representatives on Tuesday, November 29. The vote was an overwhelming 389 to 15.

HR 3012, “The Fairness for High-Skilled Immigrants Act,” would eliminate the per country limit for employment-based immigrants in a transition over a four-year period. The primary effect of the bill would be to shorten the wait times substantially for highly educated foreign nationals from India and China. The part of the Immigration and Nationality Act that limits nationals of any one country to 7 percent of the total employment-based immigrants in a year will be removed the law books. In addition, by raising the family per country limit from 7 percent to 15 percent it would also help long-waiting family-sponsored immigrants from Mexico and the Philippines.

The House Floor

Speaking in favor of the bill on the House floor, Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-UT), the chief sponsor of the bill, emphasized that the legislation provided no new green cards. He said the measure was necessary to have the law match the way employers in America hire – based on merit, not country of origin.

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Lamar Smith (R-TX) also spoke in favor of the bill. He emphasized the long wait times, pointing out that some nationals from India in the employment-based third preference (EB-3) had been waiting since 2002 for green cards. In support of the bill, Rep. Smith asked: “Why should American employers who seek green cards for skilled foreign workers have to wait longer just because the workers are from India or China?”

On the Democratic side, Representatives Steve Cohen of Tennessee and Jim Moran of Virginia spoke in favor of the bill. (No one spoke against the bill.) Rep. Moran talked about the importance of skilled immigration generally to jobs and business development in Northern Virginia.

Prospects in the Senate

The passage of the bill in the House gave bill supporters new information about the chances for the legislation to move in the Senate. The New York Times reported, “The bill seemed likely to pass easily in the Senate, said Senator Charles E. Schumer of New York, a leading Democrat on immigration.”

Explaining the implications of the bill, The New York Times noted, “By far, the main beneficiaries will be highly skilled immigrants from India and China, including many with master’s degrees and doctorates in science and engineering. Because they come from populous countries that send many people to work here who have advanced science and technology skills, immigrants from those two nations had been forced by the country limits into lines that were many years long and growing much longer.”

An Associated Press article also quoted Senator Schumer, the chair of subcommittee that handles immigration in the Senate Judiciary Committee, who is favorably disposed toward the bill: “Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., who heads the Senate Judiciary panel on immigration, said he planned to move the bill as quickly as possible in the Senate, ‘where we expect it to find overwhelming support.’ He said the legislation would ‘remove outdated constraints that prevent us from attracting the kind of innovators who can create job growth in America.’”

An analysis by the National Foundation for American Policy concluded that passing H.R. 3012 would reduce the wait for a newly sponsored foreign national from India in the employment-based third preference (EB-3) to 12 years, far less than the potential wait of several decades under current law. In the employment-based second preference (EB-2), the wait would drop to two or three years, rather than the current 6 years or more for a newly sponsored Indian-born scientist, researcher or engineer sponsored in that category.