Topic Analysis - PF H-1B Visas
By: Krithika Shamanna
Overview:
The PF TOC topic is... Resolved: The United States federal government should increase its quota of H-1B visas.
The resolution is a specific action taken by a clearly defined actor (USFG), leaving little room for definition debates.
However, in terms of framework, teams have a few different options:
Limiting the debate solely to what is in the best interest of the United States since it is the country taking the resolutional action.
Arguing against a US-centric approach to the resolution and asking the judge to evaluate impacts to both the US and other countries.
Prioritizing a specific set of impacts (i.e jobs, poverty reduction, wage growth, etc).
Another argument to consider before entering the debate is whether a shortage of high-skilled workers exists currently.
Background Info:
What is an H-1B visa?
H-1B visas are visas that temporarily allow U.S. companies to employ high-skilled foreign workers.
Many critics are skeptical of increasing the quota because they believe it will lead to more brain drain. Brain Drain is the emigration of highly trained or intelligent people from a particular country.
Other Facts to Keep In Mind
Prior to 2004, the quota on H-1B Visas used to be 195,000. However, after President George W. Bush passed the H-1B Reform Act of 2004, the cap was reduced to 65,000 (the current limit).
More than ½ of H-1B Visas have been given to high skilled workers from India.
More than ⅔ of H-1B visas are awarded to STEM industries.
Pro:
The most common argument on this topic is that affirming increases productivity in firms. By hiring people from different countries that are more specialized in certain fields, companies have a competitive edge in innovation. Due to innovation, companies are often able to expand the size of their firm.
This argument has a few core impacts:
A strong impact for the pro team is American job growth. The increase in productivity allows for companies to expand and hire more people as a result.
Similarly, many teams argue that an increase in the quota would lead to broad-based wage growth for U.S. workers as well.
Another common pro argument is remittances. Remittances make up a significant portion of the GDP of many developing countries. By increasing the quota of visas, more foreign-born workers return back to their home country subsequently. This generally positively impacts those nations' economies, helping to decrease poverty.
A few other important arguments to have prepped out include:
Increasing the quota is the only way to close the skills gap.
Increasing the quota on H-1B visas will increase access to foreign markets, which is important for the U.S. economy.
Increasing the quota increases the U.S. government’s tax revenue.
Con:
A common argument on the con is the worker exploitation argument. Many teams argue that companies only want to increase the quota on H-1B visas so that they can hire workers at a lower cost and increase their own profits. This often leads to degrading and exploitative treatment of foreign-born workers while also increasing unemployment for American workers.
This argument has a few common impacts:
Increasing workplace discrimination as older US workers and older foreign-born immigrants are fired first.
Racism and general human rights impacts.
In addition to these arguments, many teams argue that:
Increasing the quota will lead to less jobs available for native-born Americans. These teams usually must prove there is no shortage of high-skilled workers in the status quo.
H-1B workers depress American wages because they are paid less compared to their American counterpart. The creates downward pressure on wage growth.
H-1B visas facilitate outsourcing. Companies shift a significant portion of their production overseas, which takes away American manufacturing jobs.
Special thanks to Krithika Shamanna from Westwood School in TX for her expertise!