It doesn’t. Hillary is catering to wealthy tech moguls like Mark Zuckerberg (net worth $51.4 billion) who has long supported permissive immigration to admit millions of cheap workers, a policy that benefits him directly. In fact, Zuckerberg funded and led FWD.us, a business group promoting mass amnesty and increased legal immigration to keep the firehose of cheap foreign workers flowing forever.
The numbers are worth noting, since a record number of foreign students are studying in America — nearly one million in the 2014-2015 academic year — and they are not majoring in art history.
In March of 2015, Senator Sessions chaired an important hearing that examined foreign workers displacing Americans in tech jobs, from which he observed, “American schools graduate twice as many students each year with STEM degrees as there are STEM jobs to fill.”
So America has plenty of STEM workers and needs to import ZERO foreigners to take those jobs.
But Hillary Clinton would rather serve tech billionaires than look after the well-being of young Americans who have invested their time and money to have a career.
Industry-Backed Clinton Plan Gives Preference to Foreign Students over American Grads,
WASHINGTON— U.S. Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL) issued the following statement on the need to put American students first:
“Although there are more college graduates in the U.S. today than at any point in our history, many have trouble finding meaningful work in their field of study. Many are underemployed, taking jobs well below their skill level simply to make ends meet. This holds true even for those who earn degrees in the Science, Technology, Education, and Mathematics (‘STEM’) field, with prior estimates indicating that 74 percent of all STEM graduates are not working in the STEM field.
Yet, today, candidate Hillary Clinton announced that if elected president, she would ‘staple’ a green card to STEM master’s degrees and PhDs of every graduate – enabling foreign students to get green cards and thus be able to remain in the U.S. permanently and take any job. Her plan embodies a concept that has been recycled by industry year after year as ‘immigration reform,’ and would damage the job prospects of U.S. students.
Numerous, well-regarded experts in this field have rejected the narrative that there is a significant shortage of available American workers to fill positions even in the STEM labor market. In a joint op-ed, Dr. Ron Hira, Dr. Paula Stephan, Dr. Hal Salzman, Dr. Michael Teitelbaum, and Dr. Norm Matloff wrote that they were ‘compelled to report that none of us has been able to find any credible evidence to support the IT industry’s assertions of labor shortages.’ Rather, they stated that ‘there is an ample supply of American workers who are willing and qualified to fill the high-skill jobs in this country. The only real disagreement is whether supply is two or three times larger than the demand.’ They also made the following points:
It is also important to understand that the concept of ‘stapling a green card’ to a diploma puts American colleges and universities in the position of essentially selling green cards to foreign students – leading to a flood of foreign students and crowding out American students.
- The industry-backed concept of ‘stapling a green card’ to a diploma ignores the fact that the ‘“stay rates” for visiting international students are very high and have shown no sign of decline.’
- The industry-backed concept of ‘stapling a green card’ to a diploma is driven by the industry’s ‘desire for cheap, young and immobile labor.’
Young Americans graduating with master’s degrees and PhDs in these fields have sacrificed their time and energy to pursue a career in the STEM field – often at the encouragement of policymakers and national leaders – and oftentimes carry the burden of substantial student loan debt as a result. Further saturating the STEM labor market will limit their ability to obtain high-paying jobs that will allow them to pay down their debt and pursue the occupation of their choosing.
Undoubtedly, increasing high-skilled over low-skilled immigration will better serve the national interest. But there must be some limit to all categories of immigration – including high-skilled immigration. Mrs. Clinton’s industry-backed proposal is excessive, and will surely cause damage to the wages and job prospects of many young Americans.”