Wall Street Journal: “Study: Immigrants Founded 51% of U.S. Billion-Dollar Startups”

A new non-partisan study on entrepreneurship shows that immigrants started more than half of current US-based startups valued at $1 billion or more, lending credibility to the claim that immigration benefits the US economy. The study, from the National Foundation for American Policy, a non-partisan think tank based in Virginia, shows that immigrants play a “key role in creating new, fast-growing companies.” Immigrants, the study shows, have started more than half (forty-four of eighty-seven) of America’s startup companies valued at $1 billion dollars or more; moreover, immigrants are key members of management or product development teams in over seventy percent of these companies. Using public data and information from the companies, the study found that among the billion dollar startup companies, immigrant founders have created an average of approximately 760 jobs per company in the US, and the collective value of the forty-four immigrant-founded companies is $168 billion, close to half the value of the stock markets of Russia or Mexico.

India was the leading country of origin for the immigrant founders of billion dollar companies with fourteen, followed by Canada and the United Kingdom with eight each, Israel with seven, Germany with four, China with three, France with two, Ireland with two, and twelve other countries with one. The three highest valued US companies with immigrant founders include car-hailing service Uber Technologies, data-software company Palantir Technologies, and rocket maker Space Exploration Technologies.

Stuart Anderson, the author of the study and the foundation’s executive director, says the findings show that the US economy could benefit even more from foreign-born entrepreneurs if it were easier for them to obtain visas, since currently it can be difficult for foreign-born entrepreneurs to grow their companies because of the many difficulties and delays in obtaining work visas and Green Cards. The study argues that a “startup visa” to enable foreign nationals who start companies and create jobs would be an important addition to the US immigration system. “Who is going to invest in a company if the founder of the company may not be able to stay in the U.S.?” Anderson said in the Wall Street Journal. Many start-ups also face problems hiring new personnel because of the low quota of H-1B temporary visas, which have been decided by random lottery in recent years and is thus not a reliable category for skilled workers.

Additionally, the study argues that new immigration restrictions would likely prevent many future cutting-edge companies from being established in the United States:

Based on an examination of the biographies of company founders, if S. 2394, a bill by Senators Ted Cruz (R-TX) and Jeff Sessions (R-AL), had been in effect over the past decade, few if any of the billion dollar startup companies with an immigrant founder would have been started in the United States. That measure would impose a variety of hurdles before any foreign national could be employed by a U.S. company on an H-1B visa (typically the only practical way for a high-skilled foreign national to work in America), including, in most cases, working at least 10 years abroad before obtaining a visa in America.

While tech leaders including Mark Zuckerberg and Bill Gates have called for increasing the number of H-1B visas for skilled foreign workers, critics argue that many industries that want more H-1B visas are simply looking for cheaper foreign labor.  Mother Jones examined companies who allegedly used the H-1B program to ultimately outsource jobs from US workers, and a recent lawsuit charged that Disney colluded to replace US workers with H-1B foreign workers. The EB-JOBS Act of 2015, introduced last July as one solution for entrepreneurs, proposed to provide a two-year Green Card that would be revoked if certain financial and job-creation requirements are not met, has not proceeded because of the standstill in immigration reform.

Happy St. Patrick's Day!

Matt, who is so Irish that he speaks Irish and has an Irish passport (yep, pretty Irish), is super excited about St. Patrick's Day. So excited that on his recent trip to Iceland, he did a little St. Patrick's Day dance in the snow. Happy St. Patrick's Day, everyone (one day late)! 

DHS Enhances Optional Practical Training Program in STEM Fields

Last week the US Department of Homeland Security (DHS) published a final rule to strengthen and enhance the Optional Practical Training (OPT) program for international students in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields, allowing students from accredited schools the option to work in the US for up to three years after graduation. The final rule replaces the existing 2008 interim final rule, and amends the current regulations at 8 C.F.R. parts 214 and 274a, regarding OPT for F-1 nonimmigrant students who have completed a STEM degree. The rule, which received more than 50,000 comments, the most in DHS history, will officially go into effect Tuesday, May 10, 2016.

“The new rule for STEM OPT will allow international students with qualifying degrees to extend the time they participate in practical training, while at the same time strengthening oversight and adding new features to the program,” Lou Farrell, director of the Student and Exchange Visitor Program (SEVP) said in the press release.

The final rule, part of Obama’s executive action proposals, increases the STEM OPT extension from the current seventeen months to twenty-four months, and also includes the following enhancements and protections:

• Only students who earned a degree from a school accredited by a U.S. Department of Education-recognized accrediting agency and certified by SEVP may apply for a STEM OPT extension.

• Participating students who receive an additional qualifying degree from an accredited college or university can apply for a second STEM OPT extension.

• Participating students can use a previously-earned qualifying degree to apply for a STEM OPT extension. The prior degree must not have already formed the basis of a STEM OPT extension and must be from a school that is both accredited by a U.S. Department of Education-recognized accrediting agency and certified by SEVP at the time of the student’s STEM OPT application. The student’s most recent degree must also be from an accredited and SEVP-certified institution.

• Employers participating in STEM OPT must incorporate a formal training program that includes concrete learning objectives with proper oversight.

• Employers and students must report material changes in their training program.

• To guard against adverse effects on U.S. workers, terms and conditions of a student’s training opportunity – such as duties, hours, and compensation – must be on par with U.S. workers in similar positions in the same geographic area of employment. Additionally, the student must not replace a full-time, part-time, temporary or permanent U.S. worker.

• Students must work a minimum of 20 hours per week per employer to qualify.

• Students are permitted a limited period of unemployment during the initial period of post-completion OPT and the STEM OPT extension.

• All STEM OPT employers must participate in DHS’ E-Verify program.

As BuzzFeed points out, the new regulation is meant to attract high-demand tech and engineering talent to the US, and is beneficial for not only foreign students in STEM fields after graduation but also the American universities that recruit them. Since the vast majority of foreign students pay full tuition, without relying on institutional scholarships or even federal student loans, foreign students are important sources of revenue for many American colleges. The influx of foreign students in the US last year was at the highest growth rate in thirty-five years.

“This extension is absolutely going to help colleges in the competition for the limited pool of international students [that want] a top-flight education in an advanced industrial economy,” Bill Stock, the incoming president of the American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA), said in BuzzFeed.

“As a kid, you have this craze of going to the U.S. to study,” Sapan Patel, an Indian student who graduated in 2012 with a master’s degree from NYU’s Tandon School of Engineering, told BuzzFeed. “But the worry and stress of getting a job in the U.S., to have that hanging over your head, that scares you.” Because of the uncertain and difficult visa process, Patel said, “some of my friends might decide to go to Canada, where getting a work permit and becoming a citizen is much easier, or to Australia.”

Along with the rule’s official publication, the Student and Exchange Visitor Program (SEVP), which monitors international students and also certifies schools and programs, launched a STEM OPT Hub on DHS’ Study in the States. This hub includes resources for students, designated school officials, and employers.

Little Manhattan

Little Manhattan by Yutaka Sone.

Yutaka Sone, who lives and works in Los Angeles, is an incredible artist. He is known for creating models ranging from absurdly accurate marble island cities to overgrown painted palm trees, though his work also spans other media including painting, drawings, photography, video, and performance. Little Manhattan, currently at the High Line Park about a stone's throw from our office, is an almost nine-foot-long marble sculpture of the island of Manhattan. Featuring incredibly detailed and meticulous carving, the sculpture includes every bridge, pier, and building found in Manhattan at the time of the sculpture’s creation. While I wasn't able to get close enough to pick out our office building, the sculpture is fantastic and certainly worth checking out, which you should do by the end of this month before it's gone. 

New York Times: “10 Shots Across the Border”

The death of a Mexican teenager four years ago in Nogales, Mexico and its aftermath has again led to serious questions about the agency’s use of excessive force as well as corruption within Customs and Border Protection’s (CBP) Border Patrol. In 2012, when Nogales police and the Border Patrol were alerted to two drug smugglers at the border wall that splits Nogales, one Border Patrol officer, Lonnie Ray Swartz, who claimed that rocks were being thrown at the officers, opened fire. He shot sixteen-year-old José Antonio Elena Rodríguez on the Mexican side of the border. Rodriguez’s death was, in the words of James F. Tomsheck, who at the time led CBP’s Office of Internal Affairs, the “most egregious’’ of any excessive-force cases he’d seen at the agency, telling the New York Times that he felt ‘‘angry and sickened. Even if he had been throwing rocks previously—it’s conceivable, but there’s no evidence. But this was evidence of a Border Patrol agent shooting an unarmed boy.’’ By not charging the agent, Tomsheck said, the message would be that it’s “open season at the border.’’

Tomsheck, who has since left the agency, has been a severe critic of CBP’s handling of violence and abuse claims as well as CBP leadership, which he said had ‘‘a well-established history of intentional misinformation. Having sat through these meetings for years, after every one of these shootings, there’s an effort to spin and distort facts and obscure a clear understanding of what actually occurred.’’ In his position in Internal Affairs at the agency, he claimed that he held little actual power to investigate and remedy the misconduct claims. “We had a mandate to hold the Border Patrol accountable but were given very few to no authorities to do that job,’’ he told the New York Times.  ‘‘From Day 1, they aggressively resisted every effort.’’

In the past years, CPB has been accused of many instances of excessive force and abuse, including the shooting death of a Mexican man who was at a park with his family when a Border Patrol boat opened fire on a crowd of people, as well as other instances. A 2013 investigation by the Arizona Republic found that since 2005, CBP agents had killed forty-two people, and few had faced any repercussions even when the justification for the shooting was in doubt. While on average one CBP officer was arrested every day between 2005 and 2012—144 of them for corruption-level offenses—historically, Border Patrol agents have been rarely disciplined for misconduct allegations. In the case of Rodríguez, the officer who killed him was indicted three years after the teenager’s death, and only after the family’s civil lawsuit against the officer brought the case to public attention.  

One possible reason for the increase in misconduct cases over the years has been the dramatic surge in the number of border agents after September 11, along with the militarization of the agency. The number of Border Patrol agents doubled from 11,000 to 22,000, during President Bush’s second term, and the border patrol received such military hardware as drones, assault rifles, and Black Hawk helicopters. This arguably resulted in inexperienced agents with excessive firepower and a military-like mindset who often escalated tense situations.

In their defense, CBP agency leaders have said that critics don’t understand the threats Border Patrol agents face, and that it’s easy for those to judge who don’t “wear green,” a reference to the border patrol uniforms. With dangerous drug cartels operating on the border, agents must be vigilant in the threat of extreme violence. "Anything that is out there can be used against our agents," Hector Garza, spokesman for the Laredo local of the border agents union, told the Los Angeles Times. "Mesquite wood, firearms, rocks, you name it." The National Border Patrol Council, which exclusively represents approximately 18,000 Border Patrol Agents and support personnel, claims that despite being one of the largest law enforcement agencies in the US, Border Patrol agents “use lethal force seven times less than the average law enforcement officer nationwide. The facts don't lie, we stand by our agents and the truth.”