ILW.COM - the immigration portal Immigration Daily

Home Page

Advanced search

Immigration Daily


Processing times

Immigration forms

Discussion board



Twitter feed

Immigrant Nation


CLE Workshops

Immigration books

Advertise on ILW

VIP Network


Chinese Immig. Daily


Connect to us

Make us Homepage



The leading
immigration law
publisher - over
50000 pages of free

Immigration LLC.

< Back to current issue of Immigration Daily < Back to current issue of Immigrant's Weekly

Dear Editor:
Although he has not provided the authority for his assertion, and therefore, as a lawyer, I find his claims unreliable, now I understand the point made by Chucky that ". . . the near 17,000 visas that will count towards the next fiscal year cap of 65,000 are all that have been processed to date.". I do not, however, understand his conclusion that, "This paltry amount clearly demonstrates that those who have been clamoring for an increase back to 195,000 have no legitimate basis to make such demands and those that clamor for an unlimited amount of H-1B visas have no moral basis." There is no "moral basis" for anything here, since "morality" has nothing to do with H-1B visas. What H-1B visas mean to American business is that when US workers are in short supply, or woefully unqualified to fill specialty occupation positions, there is an alternative - seeking qualified foreign labor at prevailing wage rates, to fill those positions. This truth was borne out in the dot-com era, when foreign computer skills were needed in the high-tech industries, and American labor simply could not fill the void created by a burgeoning industry that needed to move at the speed of a silicon chip. The net result of the restriction of H-1B visas has resulted in "outsourcing" of jobs to other countries. While the dot-coms have come and gone, it is still better to import foreign labor, have the lawful aliens pay US taxes, and spend their money here, supporting local US business communities, rather than simply outsourcing. I, for one, do not "clamor" for a cap of 195,000, I support no cap at all, the way it was back in "the good old days", because there is no basis for having such a restrictive law in the 21st century, except to proliferate an isolationist policy of "us" and "them". The US needs well-managed, well-controlled, immigration, through a properly-devised system of law and regulation that meets the needs of US families, employers, and aliens alike. CIS chief, Edward Aguirre, and his team at DHS/CIS have proclaimed their devotion to improving the regulations,the enforcement, and the service procedure by 2006. While we have heard this lip-service for the past twenty years, nothing ever changed, until now. I applaud Mr. Aguirre and his staff for rapidly implementing the procedural changes we have seen in the past few months faster than the Lone Ranger's speeding silver bullet, and urge them to keep up the good work.

David D. Murray
Newport Beach, CA