Nativist blame game

With the economy in the doldrums, it seems the nativists have a new incentive to express their xenophobia.

Recently, a commercial aired by the Coalition of the Future American Worker alleged that 2.5 million Americans lost their jobs in 2008, while the American government continues bringing in 1.5 million foreign workers a year.

The figures were questionable, and the purpose of the commercial was to use foreign workers displacing Americans as a legislative wedge issue.

It seems history keeps repeating itself. Didn’t the American government try futilely to exclude foreign workers in the past because of similarly flimsy fears?

In 1882, the U.S. government passed the Chinese Exclusion Act to curtail immigration from China. The locals feared that American employers would employ the industrious and less expensive Chinese laborers, threatening their own job security.

Their efforts were futile. Employers simply searched for other sources of cheap labor – the Japanese, Koreans, South Indians, Filipinos and so on. Every time Congress created legislation like the Gentlemen’s Agreement of 1907 and the Immigration Act of 1924, employers would find a loophole around the laws.

In today’s global economy, there is no doubt American corporations will figure means to cut cost, even though stronger restrictions are imposed on the H-1B visa program and illegal immigrants.

In fact, the recent hiring restriction clause in the stimulus package might set precedent for more anti-immigration measures, which could do grievous harm to the economy.

Recent research by William R. Kerr of the Harvard Business School and William F. Lincoln of the University of Michigan found a strong correlation between increased numbers of H-1B visas and increased numbers of patents applied for in the United States.

The research cited in a BusinessWeek story by Vivek Wadhwa showed that from 2000 to 2004, Chinese engineers contributed 11.8 percent and Indians contributed 7.6 percent of all patents filed; combined, both groups constitute less than 2 percent of the population.

These figures show that highly skilled immigrants power America’s innovation engine, and restricting these workers might erode America’s technological advantage.

Of course, calls for protectionism are natural – citizens want their government to protect them when the going gets tough.

Let’s not forget, however, America was also the country that pioneered the neo-liberalist ideology of free trade and anti-protectionism – and reaped the rewards of it.

In the current situation, American corporations are simply practicing the free-market ideology and staying relevant in this global economy by hiring foreign workers. These workers should not be seen as the problem crippling the economy but rather as helping these companies stay productive.

The real issue is the nativistic blame game that underlines a xenophobic agenda.

“Foreign workers are targeted because they don’t have a political voice,” said María Pabón López, assistant professor of law at IU. “The nativists blame the people who can’t vote.”

López explained that the H-1B visa program is always oversubscribed and thus it makes sense to actually expand it.

Foreign workers contribute significantly to the society – they pay taxes, they work oftentimes twice as hard, they are paid less and they add fuel to the American economy. Yet when the economy goes sour, they are also persecuted for the attributes that made them an asset.

The question really is who adds value or hurts the economy: divisive anti-immigration propaganda, or foreign workers who work hard and contribute to society?