A Bloomberg editorial this month brought much-needed attention to some of the flaws in the H-1B visa program, particularly the inefficiencies of the lottery system for allocating the limited number of visas available each year. As the primary visa category for U.S. employers seeking high-skilled foreign talent, the current approach is unpredictable, prone to manipulation, and fails to ensure that the U.S. reaps the full economic benefits of the program.
While the editorial board correctly suggests that shifting to a merit- based system could help address some of these concerns with the lottery, their proposal doesn’t tackle the broader problems with the program. Creation of the lottery in the first place was a stopgap measure to address the fact that the demand for these visas each year vastly outstrips the supply. But even beyond the numeric levels, like the other temporary worker visa categories, the H-1B program is rigid, outdated, and unresponsive to the U.S. economy’s labor demands. And the program’s blunt design also fails to provide adequate protection against wage depression for some U.S. workers.
Like most of our temporary worker categories, the H-1B program suffers from profound legislative neglect. It was first established in 1990, before the internet was even public. The U.S. economy has, of course, undergone radical transformations since then that have created new and evolving demands for workers with specialized skills that can’t be sourced exclusively by workers born here. U.S. businesses have been sounding the alarm for years that our systemic dysfunction has undermined their ability to hire and retain the talent
they need to compete in a global economy. And now the National Academy of Sciences warns that without changes to our immigration system we will lose out in the “fierce” competition for high-skilled talent.
The inescapable reality is that when visa levels and program modifications require an act of Congress, the system will inevitably lag behind the demands of the modern workforce. The politicization of immigration policy has led to decades of paralysis. To move forward, Congress must either develop a system that adapts to changing socio-economic conditions or delegate authority to a commission of non-partisan, technical experts who can ensure our immigration policy remains responsive and effective.
