Trump Transition Leaders Call For Eased Tech Immigration Policy
theodp writes: In 2012, now-Microsoft President Brad Smith unveiled Microsoft’s National Talent Strategy, a two-pronged strategy that called for tech visa restrictions to be loosened to allow tech companies to hire non-U.S. citizens to fill jobs until more American schoolchildren could be made tech-savvy enough to pass hiring standards. Shortly thereafter, tech-backed nonprofit Code.org emerged (led by Smith’s next-door neighbor Hadi Partovi with Smith as a founding Board member) with a mission to ensure that U.S. schoolchildren started receiving ‘rigorous’ computer science education instruction. Around the same time, Mark Zuckerberg’s FWD.us PAC launched (with support from Smith, Partovi, and other tech leaders) with a mission to reform tech visa policy to meet tech’s need for talent.
Fast forward to 2024, and Newsweek reports the debate over tech immigration policy has been revived, spurred by the recent appointment of Sriram Krishnan as senior policy adviser for AI at the Trump White House. Comments by far-right political activist Laura Loomer on Twitter about Krishnan’s call for loosening Green Card restrictions were met with rebuttals from prominent tech leaders who are also serving as members of the Trump transition team. Entrepreneur David Sacks, who Trump has tapped as his cryptocurrency and AI czar, took to social media to clarify that Krishnan advocates for removing country caps on green cards, not eliminating caps entirely, aiming to create a more merit-based system. However, the NY Times reported that Sacks discussed a much broader visa reform proposal with Trump during a June podcast (“What I will do is,” Trump told Sacks, “you graduate from a college, I think you should get automatically, as part of your diploma, a green card to be able to stay in this country”). Elon Musk, the recently appointed co-head of Trump’s new Dept. of Government Efficiency (DOGE) had Sacks’ and Krishnan’s backs (not unexpected — both were close Musk advisors on his Twitter purchase), tweeting out “Makes sense” to his 209 million followers, lamenting that “the number of people who are super talented engineers AND super motivated in the USA is far too low,” reposting claims crediting immigrants for 36% of the innovation in the U.S., and taking USCIS to task for failing to immediately recognize his own genius with an Exceptional Ability Green Card (for his long-defunct Zip2 startup).
Vivek Ramaswamy, who Trump has tapped to co-lead DOGE with Musk, agreed and fanned the Twitter flames with a pinned Tweet of his own explaining, “The reason top tech companies often hire foreign-born — first-generation engineers over “native” Americans isn’t because of an innate American IQ deficit (a lazy — wrong explanation). A key part of it comes down to the c-word: culture.” (Colorado Governor Jared Polis also took to Twitter to agree with Musk and Ramaswamy on the need to import ‘elite engineers’). And Code.org CEO Partovi joined the Twitter fray, echoing the old we-need-H1B-visas-to-make-US-schoolchildren-CS-savvy argument of Microsoft’s 2012 National Talent Strategy. “Did you know 2/3 of H1B visas are for computer scientists?” Partovi wrote in reply to Musk, Loomer, and Sachs. “The H1B program raises $500M/year (from its corporate sponsors) and all that money is funneled into programs at Labor and NSF without focus to grow local CS talent. Let’s fund CS education.” The NYT also cited Zuckerberg’s earlier efforts to influence immigration policy with FWD.us (which also counted Sacks and Musk as early supporters), taking note of Zuck’s recent visit to Mar-a-Lago and Meta’s $1 million donation to Trump’s upcoming inauguration.
So, who is to be believed? Musk, who attributes any tech visa qualms to “a ‘fixed pie’ fallacy that is at the heart of much wrong-headed economic thinking” and argues that “there is essentially infinite potential for job and company creation [‘We should let anyone in the country who is hardworking and honest and will be a contributor to the United States,’ Musk has said]”? Or economists who have found that immigration and globalization is not quite the rising-tide-that-raises-all-boats it’s been cracked up to be?
Read more of this story at Slashdot.
theodp writes: In 2012, now-Microsoft President Brad Smith unveiled Microsoft’s National Talent Strategy, a two-pronged strategy that called for tech visa restrictions to be loosened to allow tech companies to hire non-U.S. citizens to fill jobs until more American schoolchildren could be made tech-savvy enough to pass hiring standards. Shortly thereafter, tech-backed nonprofit Code.org emerged (led by Smith’s next-door neighbor Hadi Partovi with Smith as a founding Board member) with a mission to ensure that U.S. schoolchildren started receiving ‘rigorous’ computer science education instruction. Around the same time, Mark Zuckerberg’s FWD.us PAC launched (with support from Smith, Partovi, and other tech leaders) with a mission to reform tech visa policy to meet tech’s need for talent.
Fast forward to 2024, and Newsweek reports the debate over tech immigration policy has been revived, spurred by the recent appointment of Sriram Krishnan as senior policy adviser for AI at the Trump White House. Comments by far-right political activist Laura Loomer on Twitter about Krishnan’s call for loosening Green Card restrictions were met with rebuttals from prominent tech leaders who are also serving as members of the Trump transition team. Entrepreneur David Sacks, who Trump has tapped as his cryptocurrency and AI czar, took to social media to clarify that Krishnan advocates for removing country caps on green cards, not eliminating caps entirely, aiming to create a more merit-based system. However, the NY Times reported that Sacks discussed a much broader visa reform proposal with Trump during a June podcast (“What I will do is,” Trump told Sacks, “you graduate from a college, I think you should get automatically, as part of your diploma, a green card to be able to stay in this country”). Elon Musk, the recently appointed co-head of Trump’s new Dept. of Government Efficiency (DOGE) had Sacks’ and Krishnan’s backs (not unexpected — both were close Musk advisors on his Twitter purchase), tweeting out “Makes sense” to his 209 million followers, lamenting that “the number of people who are super talented engineers AND super motivated in the USA is far too low,” reposting claims crediting immigrants for 36% of the innovation in the U.S., and taking USCIS to task for failing to immediately recognize his own genius with an Exceptional Ability Green Card (for his long-defunct Zip2 startup).
Vivek Ramaswamy, who Trump has tapped to co-lead DOGE with Musk, agreed and fanned the Twitter flames with a pinned Tweet of his own explaining, “The reason top tech companies often hire foreign-born — first-generation engineers over “native” Americans isn’t because of an innate American IQ deficit (a lazy — wrong explanation). A key part of it comes down to the c-word: culture.” (Colorado Governor Jared Polis also took to Twitter to agree with Musk and Ramaswamy on the need to import ‘elite engineers’). And Code.org CEO Partovi joined the Twitter fray, echoing the old we-need-H1B-visas-to-make-US-schoolchildren-CS-savvy argument of Microsoft’s 2012 National Talent Strategy. “Did you know 2/3 of H1B visas are for computer scientists?” Partovi wrote in reply to Musk, Loomer, and Sachs. “The H1B program raises $500M/year (from its corporate sponsors) and all that money is funneled into programs at Labor and NSF without focus to grow local CS talent. Let’s fund CS education.” The NYT also cited Zuckerberg’s earlier efforts to influence immigration policy with FWD.us (which also counted Sacks and Musk as early supporters), taking note of Zuck’s recent visit to Mar-a-Lago and Meta’s $1 million donation to Trump’s upcoming inauguration.
So, who is to be believed? Musk, who attributes any tech visa qualms to “a ‘fixed pie’ fallacy that is at the heart of much wrong-headed economic thinking” and argues that “there is essentially infinite potential for job and company creation [‘We should let anyone in the country who is hardworking and honest and will be a contributor to the United States,’ Musk has said]”? Or economists who have found that immigration and globalization is not quite the rising-tide-that-raises-all-boats it’s been cracked up to be?
Read more of this story at Slashdot.