Edwards calls for increase in H1B visas during talks with Silicon Valley

The 54-year-old former U.S. senator and vice presidential candidate promises that an Edwards presidency will feature an ambitious proposal—fueled by public-private partnerships—to provide high-speed broadband access to all U.S. homes and businesses by 2010.

Edwards' yen for a change in direction, and deeper government involvement in broadband policies, extends to his broader technology platform.

He is calling for patent reform, increased H-1B visas, and pumped up federal spending on education, science, technology and innovation.

http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,2216265,00.asp

Link?

That is article is where I got it from. I did not see a direct quote from Edwards.

(on edit: I posted this without realized the whole blog attack Edwards) Here's blog quoting a San Jose Mercury News interview

WRIGHT: Congress and the president failed to pass any kind of immigration-reform legislation. There are still two key aspects of immigration reform that are important to California: the H-1B visa and agricultural workers. What would you do about these two specific areas? And why do you think you might be successful in getting some progress?

EDWARDS: Regarding the H-1B visa question: I think it is important for us to have available, for the work that’s being done here in this valley, plus all over the country, the talent and the mental capacity we need. So the H-1B visa program is important; it should be expanded, based on the needs that exist. Also important is that America needs to be doing a much better, more-effective job in producing, from our own young people, the talent pool that can perform these jobs, and my view is that we are not concentrating on science and math the way that we need to. We’re not concentrating on graduate education in those areas the way we need to. But immigration is a very hot topic out there in America, and a very divisive topic. You can be in front of a group of progressive Democrats, and there will be a lot of people in the room who want to know what you’re going to do about the illegal immigrants, and they’re not thinking about a path to citizenship. Secondly, I do think we should be tougher on employers who are knowingly violating the law, and in many cases, abusing workers. But the third piece, and this is the more controversial one, I do think that there should be a path to citizenship, and it needs to be a meaningful path to citizenship. I think the path that was in the bill that was last considered by the Senate was completely unrealistic. I mean most undocumented workers in America would never meet that standard, which means they would never become American citizens. And I don’t want to live in a country that’s made up of first-class citizens and second-class laborers. That’s not America.

WARNING - This link is to an anti-Edwards website which has a summary http://jre-whatsnottolike.com/2007/09/03/edwards-expand-hb1-visas-path-to-citizenship/

Here's the direct link to the San Jose Mercury News article which requires registration

http://www.mercurynews.com/opinion/ci_6790508?nclick_check=1

It has a link to the San Jose Mercury News but that requires registration

http://www.mercurynews.com/opinion/ci_6790508?nclick_check=1

Oh, man, god love the working American, eh?

no exemption for India. H1 at 400,000 and H2 (laborers) at 200,000 was where to stood when it stopped moving forward.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/23/AR2007052301230.html

the bipartisan 74 to 24 vote trimmed a program that could have admitted as many as 600,000 laborers a year down to 200,000, a level that proponents said would minimize the risk that participants would depress wages and replace U.S. workers.

The immigration compromise envisioned a program that could issue 400,000 two-year work visas a year, renewable up to three times, provided the laborers left the country for a year between each stint. If the demand for workers is high, the number of visas could rise to as many as 600,000 a year.


Some H-1B applications are not counted against the cap. These include applications by institutions of higher education, affiliated nonprofits, or nonprofit or governmental research organizations; applications by J-1 holders who have obtained a waiver through the State 30 program; and applications for extensions of stay or new employment where the person has already been counted in the last six years and the person has not been out of the country for a full year.


Senate Bill Gives U.S. Workers First Dibs on Tech Jobs
DATE: 06-APR-2007
By Deborah Perelman
One of the longest-running defenses of the hotly debated H-1B temporary worker visa program is that there are simply not enough U.S. workers to fill out many corporations' programming, engineering and back-office positions, leaving them no choice but to hire workers from overseas.

A new Senate bill—introduced in the final moments before Congress departed for its spring recess at the end of last week—takes this argument to task, demanding that employers make a "good faith" effort to hire a U.S. worker before bringing in a H-1B worker.

The Senate Bill, introduced by Sens. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), puts the onus on employers to prove that they have gone to lengths to ensure that the visa-holder would not be displacing a prospective U.S. employee.

Pointer Let Your Voice be Heard! Vote on the Most Significant New Product Introductions in the Channel. Click here to fill out our online ballot.

In addition to making a "good faith" effort to hire a U.S. worker, employers will be required to advertise job openings for 30 days on the Department of Labor's Web site before submitting applications to hire H-1B workers. The DOL would also be required to post on its site summaries of all the H-1B applications it receives.

Employers would also be prohibited from advertising positions only to H-1B holders. Though this practice is already considered illegal, many argue that that this type of discrimination against U.S. workers does indeed exist.



Other stipulations of the Senate bill demand that companies with 50 or more workers are not allowed to employ more than half of their staff through H-1B visas.

Companies that take advantage of the H-1B program would also have to prove that they were paying H-1B workers the prevailing wage for their positions. The new measure would calculate wages differently, raising the minimum for each position from its current dollar amount.

The Senate bill would also increase the power of the DOL to conduct random audits of employers that use H-1B visas. Currently, they can only investigate applications for "completeness and obvious inaccuracies." If these new provisions are passed, the DOL would be check for clear indicators of fraud and misrepresentations of fact. It would also double the review period for each application from one to two weeks.

Finally, the measure would authorize the DOL to hire 200 additional employees to administer, oversee and enforce the H-1B program.

who have the equivalent U.S. Bachelor's Degree education. H-1B employees are employed temporarily in a job category that is considered by the U.S. Citizenship & Immigration Services to be a "specialty occupation" (i.e., an occupation that requires a specialized knowledge).

The the qualified person has to take a less qualified job, taking the place of somebody who would have needed the job and so on.

Clear that you are not in the IT field.

fucking lemmings running around sleeping 5 to a bed and killing the IT labor market.

I was just pointing out to the poster that these visas are not "low wage" visas, as people might think about for maids. Also, I see no citation of this story other than in this "eweek" blog, so I would like to hear confirmation from the campaign.

party line I would choke on that BULL SHIT.

Also, I see no citation of this story other than in this "eweek" blog, so I would like to hear confirmation from the campaign.

Or just federal spending on education, science, technology and innovation?

Patent reform? Good luck.

Deeper government involvement -- how so?

but I thought he was running as protector of US unions this time around.

professionals on a temporary basis, not to hire labor.

with the understanding that he was against free trade for any reason, including allowing 'professionals' from other countries to work in American markets. Are RN's covered under these H1-b visas?

On edit: RN's are allowed to work in this country using H1-b visas, and many US RN's are dues paying union members.

Believe e-week who published it. Or your candidate who said it.

Or just pretend your candidate is for things he's against and against things he is for.

Edwards would prefer the latter.

Now run along...

Can you document this "credibility"?

Perhaps you're the one we should mistrust, seeing as though you obviously hate anyone not kissing your ass.

I may disagree with you on some things, but I think you're pretty fair yourself. I've actually seen you say you were wrong on occasion, and that always boost someone's credibility for me lol.

Rinsd is one of the good guys around here, we agree on that. :-)

I don't. :D

And thanks!

or a store. There are many, many qualified workers that have lost their jobs to H-1Bs and globalization.

Apparently, only blue-collars matter to Edwards.

That bill, had it passed, would have allowed for 400,000 guest workers a year and an unlimited number of Indian H-1B visa workers.

And yes, it was Hillary Clinton who voted for it.

:shrug:

I remember from 04 him really caring about working people.
I think this is just a rumor post or something.

And Hillary thinks offshoring is good.

I'm not sure about the others.

Like he did when he talked to Silicon Valley.

Everything is carefully couched.

The many faces of John Edwards.

His proposal mandates that companies pay H-1B workers the prevailing wage. That effectively stymies any company who would misuse the H-1B simply to hire cheap foreign labor. Edwards' actions would once-and-for-all protect American workers.

That's also a 100% difference compared to Hillary Clinton's proposals.

Edwards is blowing smoke up your ass.

Just one corroboration?

http://www.svlg.net/press/articles/080107_sjm.php

But I trust eweek more than AP.

Is the country devoid of software engineers who could fill those positions? Somehow I don't think so!

We do not have enough skilled people to fill the needs of companies. If we do not bring in this labor then the associated labor with these positions will be going overseas.

especially the high level positions.

And the foreign workers who were here for 6 months are now doing the jobs from their home countries.

Will someone hire my friends??? My company moved their roles to foreign workers and consultants, who have zero bennies. They have families too, just like foreign workers. Sigh.

I don't know if I should laugh or cry.

I own a small consulting company in Southern Cal.

First off, H1B's work for much lower costs and are often a starting point for performing work off shore in India for 1/4 of the cost.

Second, these are not always SKILLED workers they are taken care of by other Indian resources that are threatened with revocation of the H1B if they don't perform their own work and help 'train' the newbie.

Third, I have seen very few temporary workers, they become US citizens and end up taking a job from US born workers.

I do my best to use US resources but believe me, the cost factors, along with H1B's propensity to "beef" up the resume at a lower cost have a huge impact on the US workforce.

Well, whatever else, are naturalized US citizens any less a citizen than a "US born worker"?

Will a wave of anti LEGAL immigration sentiment be the next big thing?

It is not meant to be a racist comment, but why the fuck should my parents, my neighbors, etc., pay taxes that end up supporting people from other countries and set them up to create a business that creates more jobs for people currently outside of this country. There is no way to spin it, it is fucking bullshit. I have no problem with open boarders and people competing for jobs, I have a HUGE problem with US workers subsidizing training for non US workers.

Saying that someone who comes here and becomes a US citizen is less American than you is against what this country has always been about!

we should use our tax dollars to train foreign workers and lower the wages of US workers. I STRONGLY disagree. If foreign workers want to come here and compete for jobs that is fine. See the difference.

To make matters worse, my previous owner was educated at US school, the same one I went to, and he was here from India based upon grants that covered 60 - 75% of his education costs (US GRANTS) I took out loans and worked 40+ hours a week to get my degree. Now he has 90% of his workforce from India, and does his best to change companies to an onshore/offshore model where he uses the Indian expats along with resources in India. With 300 employees that means about 270 jobs lost by US born employees.