USA Green Card Immigration Blog

Paul Kedrosky and Brad Feld: Start-up Visas Can Jump-Start the Economy – WSJ.com.

While fast-growing companies have long been the main source of new jobs and innovation, this country makes it outrageously difficult for immigrants to launch new companies here. This doesn’t make any sense. After all, Google, Pfizer, Intel, Yahoo, DuPont, eBay and Procter & Gamble are all former start-ups founded by immigrants. Where would this country be today without their world-changing innovations?

Immigrants have not only founded big, well-known companies. Foreign-born residents made up just 12.5% of the U.S. population in 2008. But nearly 40% of technology company founders and 52% of founders of companies in Silicon Valley.

Yet we don’t seem to care. We send recent, foreign-born university science and engineering graduates back to their own countries after their student visas expire—unless these creative sorts are willing to spend some of the most entrepreneurial years of their lives working in a big company under an H-1B visa after they finish their studies.

For those who studied elsewhere, but who nonetheless want to bring their job-creating ideas here, American policies treat them—the job-creating, trouble-making innovators that they are—as a cross between deadbeats and queue-jumpers. Why can’t they wait in line like everyone else to get a visa in five years or so? What’s their hurry?

Their hurry is Joseph Schumpeter’s hurry: They want to hustle out and disrupt markets when the opportunity arises.

In the 21st century those opportunities don’t wait for our interminable, employment-based visa programs. As a result rather than saying “Come and create jobs here” we, in effect, tell them to shove off. Come back when you have a few million in sales— at which point they will be rooted elsewhere and creating jobs somewhere else.

That needs to end now. Immigrants who come here to create companies create jobs. We need the jobs.

One good idea to make this process easier is to create a new visa for entrepreneurs, something that is increasingly being called by venture capitalists, entrepreneurs, and angel investors a “start-up visa.” It might work like this: If immigrant entrepreneurs want to start a company in the U.S. and are able to raise a moderate amount of money (perhaps as little as $125,000) from an accredited U.S.-based venture capital firm or qualified U.S.-based angel investors, we should let them start a company here. It could be a couple of founders with an idea—that’s it. We would give visas to the founders and welcome them in to our country.

Would it work every time? Of course not. It would fail more often than not. Start-ups often fail.

But having failed, the immigrant entrepreneurs could try again, and again. And as long as they are trying, raising money, creating jobs, and making sales, we would let them stay here. Founders of new companies are precious for a vibrant economy, and we should welcome them. Indeed, the country would be better served to find more of them.

Some will say a start-up visa program will be abused. They will say that it will become a way to end-run immigration rules, to jump the queue if you have money.

There are at least two answers to these objections. First, to get such a visa you would have to raise money from real investors. Second, Canada and other countries already allow entrepreneurs to start a company in their country. Shouldn’t the U.S. stop worrying so much about keeping these people out, and start worrying about bringing them in?

We also think science and engineering graduates should get visas stapled to their diplomas. You complete your higher education here, you get to stay so that you can get out and create jobs, innovate, and grow the economy. Uncle Sam wants you, if you’re a prospective entrepreneur.

The U.S. remains one of the most attractive countries for entrepreneurs. It has a culture of risk taking, capital formation, and an economic dynamism that is the envy of the world. This gives us a competitive edge that we should not let slip through our fingers.

The Obama administration has launched a new plan to salvage the immigration detention system ridden with scandals, especially lockups at federal, state, and local levels during the presidency of George W. Bush.

The plan has its origins in the proposals mooted by Janet Napolitano, the homeland security secretary and John Morton, the director of Immigration Customs Enforcement (ICE). The suggestions mainly focus on providing better detention conditions and better medical care for the detainees as well as holding a trail of preventable injuries and deaths. The stated purpose of their proposals is to make the immigration detention system less expensive and more accountable and efficient.

The new immigration reform plan reflects a change in the attitude of the government that not all detainees are violent criminals. They could be asylum seekers, young mothers and their children, even respected members of communities whose brush with law was due to a lapsed visa.

If they do not have a genuine reason for staying, they should be deported immediately and not confined in detention centers. Those who need to be detained will be detained “in settings commensurate with the risk of flight and danger they present.”

The ICE also plans to unveil a new medical classification system to improve medical care and bring down unnecessary medical transfers. However, the details of the scheme are yet to be clarified by ICE.

The most important of all immigration reform measures is that, central control over subcontracted system has been reaffirmed. This stresses that central control is a smarter and cheaper option. The entire plan will be well within the budget as there is less dependence on contractors who perform important federal duties.

If these policies turn out to be a success and if they continue to be implemented, it will make up for years of neglect suffered under previous administrations.

Doing away with the `widow’s penalty’ – Editorials – MiamiHerald.com.

With a 79-19 Senate vote, Congress has corrected one of the more draconian immigration policies to be visited upon foreign-born spouses of American citizens.

Called the “widow’s penalty,”‘ the policy allows immigration officials to annul spouses’ applications for permanent residency when their American husbands or wives die before the marriage is two years old.

The new immigration measure will allow foreigners married to U.S. citizens to apply for permanent residency without waiting two years, and the death of a spouse won’t be a determining factor in the outcome.

Immigration reform needs real debate.

A major problem in this country is a lack of Immigration reform. We as Americans have benefited from immigration from the inception of this country. We need to continue to use immigration for the benefit of American Citizens. Yes, there is a way that we as Americans can benefit without the fear of losing jobs.

Jobs are available but we as Americans cannot obtain them because of one reason or another but not because of the illegal immigrants. Most of the time, young Americans cannot find a job because of their criminal record. Many young people cannot get a job because of the stringent requirements that U.S. Corporations are demanding on new recruits and the inability of young people to clear their records after they have paid the price to society.

Until we understand that Immigration will benefit us as Americans our U.S. economy will continue to be affected. Since Immigration officials began deporting Mexican illegal immigrants, our economy has gone down and will continue to go down. Immigration should have been Obama’s first move and then plenty of tax money would be available to further help the Medical Insurance Reform.

CNSNews.com – Obama: Immigration Reform Will Allow Illegal Immigrants to Become Legal and Get Health Care Coverage.

President Barack Obama told the Congressional Hispanic Caucus Institute (CHCI) on Wednesday evening that illegal immigrants would not get government funded health insurance under his health care reform, but said the debate over that plan underscores the need to legalize illegal immigrants so they can get that coverage.

“As you know there’s been a little controversy about who exactly will be covered under reform,” said Obama. “I want to be clear: If someone is here illegally, they won’t be covered under this plan. That’s a commitment I’ve made.

“But I also want to make this clear: Even though I do not believe we can extend coverage to those who are here illegally, I also don’t simply believe we can ignore the fact that our immigration system is broken,” the president said.�
�
“That’s why I strongly support making sure folks who are here legally have access to affordable, quality health insurance under this plan, just like everybody else,” he added. “And we certainly should not let this debate on health care–one that’s so essential to Hispanic Americans and all Americans–get side tracked by those looking to exploit division and kill reform at any cost. That’s what they always try to do.
�
“If anything, this debate underscores the necessity of passing comprehensive immigration reform and resolving the issue of 12 million undocumented people living and working in this country once and for all,” Obama said. “That’s what I’ve said from the start. That’s what I say tonight.”

Last month in Guadalajara, Mexico, President Obama said that he was “confident” he would get Congress to enact comprehensive immigration reform that included a “pathway to citizenship” for illegal aliens.

Obama was speaking Wednesday night at the Congressional Hispanic Caucus Institute’s 32nd Annual Awards Gala.

Debating Lou Dobbs Stance On Immigration : NPR.

The immigration debate is a staple of conservative talk radio. More than 40 conservative radio hosts came to Washington this week, pressuring Congress to deny undocumented immigrants health care coverage. CNN anchor Lou Dobbs was among those holding their feet to the fire. Roberto Lovato, a journalist and activist who’s waged a campaign to get Lou Dobbs off the air, called for “Basta Dobbs” or “Enough, Dobbs.” Also joining the conversation is Ira Mehlman, a spokesman for the Federation for American Immigration Reform and Rick Rodriguez, a journalism professor at Arizona State University. The two talk with guest host Mandalit del Barco about the tenor of the debate and whether some of the rhetoric should be considered hate speech.

Click on the link above for the complete interview.

US-Cuba to talk about immigration | csmonitor.com.

The US and Cuba are scheduled to restart immigration talks for the first time since 2003.  President George W. Bush had suspended the previous talks.  The current Obama Administration hopes that Castro’s government  take further steps for political reform and respect for human rights before taking any further steps with the immigration issue and before possibly lifting the US economic embargo.

Commentary: Immigration reform takes courage – CNN.com.

No one knows whether the bill could be approved this year. If the debate carries over until 2010, midterm elections could put the issue off until 2011 — which could still work out well for the White House because achieving immigration reform would play well with Hispanics in Obama’s 2012 re-election campaign.

This time around, congressional leaders would be wise to avoid those pitfalls and focus on solving the three big problems: porous borders; the difficulty in immigrating legally; and the fact that 12 million illegal immigrants are in a state of suspended animation where they work hard, pay taxes, buy homes, and join the PTA, but never achieve full civic participation and the responsibilities that come with it.

News Analysis: Obama Launches Immigration Reform Effort, But Lines Are Already Being Drawn « Feet In 2 Worlds, Immigration News.

So what was the result of President Obama’s meeting with lawmakers on Thursday, June 25?  On the table was the topic of immigration reform.  Obama’s goal was to get both sides talking about the issues.  On what did they agree and on what did they disagree?  And is immigration reform truly a possibility during the current administration, when so many other issues (finance, healthcare, Iraq/Afghanistan, Iran/N. Korea) are still unresolved?

The renewed commitment from the Oval Office might allay advocates’ fears that the current economic crisis, as well as Obama’s high-profile efforts to enact health care reform would prevent the President and Congress from dealing with immigration this year.

Obama continued to push for a “large-scale legalization program” that would basically provide amnesty and forgiveness to about 11 million undocumented immigrants.  What is more uncertain is what to do about future immigrants.  The thorniest issue here involves expansion of the current low-skill guest worker program, which US businesses say is too small, but organized labor unions say is already too large.  The same line of reasoning goes for the current H1-B program for highly-skilled workers.

Politically speaking,  the 800-pound gorilla in the room is the economy.  Despite arguments from immigration reform advocates that large-scale reform will actually bring economic benefits, members of Congress have so far proven skittish about taking on such a heated issue in the midst of the recession.

CNN Political Ticker: All politics, all the time Blog Archive – Obama set to hold twice-delayed immigration meeting « – Blogs from CNN.com.

President Obama is scheduled to host a variety of Democratic and Republican party leaders at the White House today.  The goal is to start the conversation of how a possible immigration reform bill might look.  Obama has reiterated that he wants “comprehensive immigration reform that paves the way for citizenship for millions of undocumented workers.”

This is just a beginning, but the with nation still under seige by the continuing economic crisis, it sounds like any immigration bill will be a tough sell in the current political climate.

What do you think?