This is too logical. Instead, we have to think in terms of what greases the skids of politicians. And we come up an administration that advertizes availablility of food stamps, via foreign embassies and consulates, as a way to attract immigrants.
It's more important to think in terms of what gets you the votes, evidently.
The problem with the ENTIRE visa program is the "bait and switch" aspect of the visas.
Corporate America, their sock-puppet political allies, and the corporate media propose one visa but then corporate America uses the visa in unadvertised and supposedly unintended ways.
For instance, the H-1B visa is advertised as a visa for "highly skilled" workers, when in fact the GAO has found that 94% of the recipients of H-1B visas are not even "Fully Competent."
In 2011, the GAO produced a report for Congress that concluded that a mere 6% of recipients of H-1B visas are "Fully Competent" with 54% of the recipients of the H-1B visa being "Entry Level" workers. As a matter of fact, many disenfranchised US STEM workers had to train their replacements.
Clearly, corporate America is training the recipients of these H-1B visas. Instead of training foreign workers, we should be training the 50% of recent college grads who have yet to receive full time employment. Instead of training foreign workers, we should be updating the skills of disenfranchised US STEM workers.
But what do we hear from the corporations, the political sock-puppets, the corporate media, and the organizations who are chartered to represent the interests of the US STEM worker (like the IEEE and the IEEE-USA)? We hear more anecdotes that support methods for accelerating the hiring of more cheap, entry level, third world workers, primarily from India and Communist China, that will displace and disenfranchise even more US STEM workers.
Here are my comments on the start up act -
Regarding the foreign-born software executive - his best action is to leave US, since he has to deal with so much scrutiny.
Replay available now: A handful of emerging network technologies are competing to be the preferred wide-area connection for the Internet of Things. All claim lower costs and power use than cellular but none have wide deployment yet. Listen in as proponents of leading contenders make their case to be the metro or national IoT network of the future. Rick Merritt, EE Times Silicon Valley Bureau Chief, moderators this discussion. Join in and ask his guests questions.