Track your comments!
[x]


When you register, comments on your articles and replies to your comments appear here. Register Now!

Sign in to your account
[x]

Not a Scientific Blogging member yet?

Register Now for a Free Scientificblogging.com Account

  • Customize your profile with pictures, banner, a blogroll and more.
  • Leave comments on articles, add other members to your friend lists, chat with people on the site.
  • Write blog posts that can be seen by hundreds of thousands of readers.

It's free and it only takes a minute!

Already a Scientific Blogging member?

Sign In Now

Banner
By Michael White | July 10th 2008 08:31 PM | 7 comments | Print | E-mail | Track Comments
.

More Adaptive Complexity articles

All

About Michael White

Welcome to Adaptive Complexity, where I write about genomics, systems biology, evolution, and the connection between science and literature, government, and society.

I'm a biochemist


... Full Bio

Continuing my science policy blogging streak (we'll get back to real science here soon, I promise!), it's worth noting Washington Post columnist George Will's recent piece about our "perverse national policy of expelling talented people."

If you've spent any time recently around America's science PhD programs, you'll have heard about the problem: we bring talented people in from all over the world, train them to do great science, and then make it impossible for them to get a job here, even when US companies and universities want to hire them. As George Will writes, this creates yet one more incentive for US companies to send their operations outside of the US:

But one reason Microsoft opened a software development center in Vancouver [Canada] is that Canadian immigration laws allow Microsoft to recruit skilled people it could not retain under U.S. immigration restrictions.

It's not just a problem for Microsoft. A Chinese colleague of mine recently lamented that her husband, a skilled, PhD computational biologist, could not get a job with a local technology company, even though they wanted to hire him. It is just too difficult to get a work visa.

Not too long ago, I had a conversation with a young Professor of Medieval Studies, who is German. Although she has a job, she's having a terrible time getting permanent resident status. While she's in limbo, she can't go back home to visit family in Germany, or she'll lose any chance of reentering the US. Her troubles also include some insulting questioning by a half-educated INS bureaucrat who questioned whether Medieval Studies was a legitimate subject of academic study.

Is this policy right? Are these foreign nationals competing for US jobs, justifying our immigration stance? George Will's answer (and I agree) is this:

U.S. policy should be: A nation cannot have too many such people, so send us your PhDs yearning to be free.

We need these people. They contribute a vital part of our academic and industrial research programs; universities and companies should be able to any hired talented people they want, because we really don't have enough of these people - US citizens or not. There are simply not enough US citizens around to perform these jobs. While we've been sending these people away, European nations have been snapping them up.

US science became great during the 20th century in part because we welcomed top scientists (and educated workers in other fields) from other countries to come work in our university and corporate labs. That strategy worked, and there is no reason for us not to keep following it.

As George Will puts it:

"Solutions to some problems are complex; removing barriers to educated immigrants is not."


Comments

Hank's picture
Thank you for being someone else on this site who recognizes that our problem is not just science education but educating scientists who are then forced to leave.

Our half-baked immigration policy is just warmed-over protectionism from the 1990s, supposedly to protect jobs in the US. But it did nothing of the kind and instead caused employers to go where the talent is.

There are some 500,000 scientists who are stuck on a waiting list and it makes no sense at all. Our science education problem evaporates if we worry less about making more Americans into scientists and more about making scientists into Americans.

adaptivecomplexity's picture
Exactly, it makes no sense at all. My Chinese friend commented that it is easier to get permanent resident status here if you have family members here, even if you come with no job skills to contribute. I'm not advocating that we bar family members, but it doesn't make any sense to give educated immigrants a more difficult time than we give relatives of naturalized immigrants.

I would also argue that if we let US science thrive with the help of educated immigrants, chances are higher that native-born citizens will see this as an attractive career.

Not that I really care whether someone is a permanent resident, naturalized citizen, or native born. And employers don't care either, as long has they have skills.

Mike

Hank's picture
Indeed, in San Jose, at least, for qualified people (at the high end) there is negative unemployment. Due to that, we have always gotten a subset of PhDs who only are in the corporate world because they couldn't get a professor job (you can imagine how well that usually works out) but we still hire them just the same.

Sung to the tune of the Mickey Mouse theme:
M-I-T. P-H-D. M-O-N-E-Y.

I have been baffled for years by the hand wringing because we can't overachieve enough young people's interest in science - the solution remains to stop worrying about why some people don't like science and make the ones who do part of our culture. Then science becomes a greater part of our culture too.

And America would remain the greatest science community in the universe, unless you believe in super-smart aliens.

Attracting and maintaining the world's smartest people has never worked for us before, so why should it now? It's not like the Manhattan project was done by a bunch of unamerican furriners, amirite?

adaptivecomplexity's picture
You're right, it's a terrible strategy. :)

Mike

Yep. Enrico Fermi, Edward Teller, John von Neumann and others who were responsible for the Manhattan project were 100% home-bred 10th generation Americans.

Hank's picture
Exactly.   The ridiculous visa restrictions to supposedly protect American jobs that were enacted by Clinton and renewed by Bush means we could never have gotten great talent from elsewhere and kept them.  Instead we would have educated them here and then forced them to go home.

Here's hoping someone in Obama's ear does more than just go nonlinear about global warming and instead talks about helping all science by letting more scientists who want to be here stay here.   All these stupid visa restrictions did was lead to more outsourcing.

Add a comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <sup> <sub> <a> <em> <strong> <center> <cite> <code> <TH><ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <img> <br> <p> <blockquote> <strike> <object> <param> <embed> <del> <pre> <b> <i> <table> <tbody> <div> <tr> <td> <h1> <h2> <h3> <h4> <h5> <h6> <hr> <iframe>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
CAPTCHA
If you register, you will never be bothered to prove you are human again. And you get a real editor toolbar to use instead of this HTML thing that wards off spam bots.