H-1B visas and academia

Sorry to talk politics.

In now-classic fashion, there was a just-before-close-of-business-Friday announcement by the executive branch yesterday of a "proclamation" that would seriously up-end the H-1B visa program.  (I have no idea why some of these things are called "executive orders" and some are called "proclamations".)  The short version (see this summary by an immigration law firm):  After midnight EDT tonight, for at least the next year, getting a new H-1B visa for someone outside the US will require the employer to pay a $100K fee.  If someone is a current H-1B visa holder and they are presently outside the US after tonight, it sounds like that fee may need to be paid to get back into the US, if this stands. 

The history of this is complicated.  A standard concern is that this program can be and has been abused by tech companies, for example, who have been able to bring skilled workers in certain sectors into the US and pay them comparatively low wages.  Thus, runs the argument, these visas depress wages for domestic workers and make it harder for domestic workers to be competitive for such jobs.   While these are non-immigration visas, certainly a decent fraction of H-1B holders have gone down the path of applying for permanent residency or citizenship.  Personally, I think that the overall economic and cultural benefit to the US is hugely positive, though this being the internet I'm sure someone will argue this in the comments.

Like a large fraction of the Friday afternoon proclamations or executive orders, this is a chaos grenade for academia.  The large majorities of articles in the media about this issue do not point out that the H-1B process is widely used by universities to bring international scholars (faculty members, postdocs, research scientists) into the US.   If every H-1B for someone presently outside the US is now going to cost the sponsor $100K up front, this would be extremely disruptive.  The situation in academia is distinctly different from that in high tech industry - the arguments about wage suppression are not nearly as relevant. 

For the last 70+ years, the US has reaped enormous economic, societal, and national security benefits from being a global destination for top scientists, engineers, and scholars.  No system is perfect, but destroying all of this without any realistic plan to replace it is just self-defeating.  When the secretary of commerce says "the gold [$2M for sponsorship] and platinum [$5M for sponsorship] cards would replace employment-based visas that offer paths to citizenship, including for professors, scientists, artists and athletes", that's disconnected from reality for the world of professors and scientists.  It's not hard to envision that a dedicated visa class (like the F1 visas for students) exempt from crazy fees could be created specifically for PhD-level scholars and researchers, but this would require an actual plan from Congress as well as support for the idea.  

As I've said about other topics, don't panic just yet.  It seems certain that there will be lawsuits filed about this bright and early on Monday morning.  Like many other research-related issues (e.g. slashed indirect cost rates), this will very likely be tied up in court for years, and the biggest fees in the near term will go to lawyers.  Still, it's unclear what the status quo will be while those legal arguments are waged, and the executive branch does have a lot of latitude in the US system.  Stay tuned, and if you are in a position to do so, make your voices heard to your legislators.

(US budget update:  the actual spending bills before congress largely ignore the presidential budget recommendation and its brutal cuts.  Of course, there is a showdown brewing about a continuing resolution since it's unclear whether these bills can pass congress.  It's also unclear whether agencies would actually spend their appropriated budgets.  As before, this is a marathon, not a sprint.)