From rweaver@aludra.usc.eduThu Mar 14 08:46:07 1996 Date: Tue, 12 Mar 1996 08:39:07 -0800 (PST) From: Bob Weaver To: institute@ieee.org Subject: IEEE "high-tech immigration" policy [ The following is in response to "Should the U.S. limit high-tech immigration?" in the current issue of The Institute, under "marketplace of ideas". ] In the same issue of The Institute which solicited member views on immigration, I read that IEEE has already endorsed legislation to restrict immigration of foreign engineers. This represents either arrogance on the part of the policy makers or a major foul-up. Clearly, any official endorsement or opposition by IEEE on an issue this controversial and critical to U.S. engineering leadership should come only AFTER having consulted the membership, not before! Anything less negates the representative nature of the IEEE, which, I might point out, is in very substantial measure supported by U.S. members who were once immigrants. Characterizing foreign-born engineers as "cheap labor", as IEEE-USA does, is patently offensive and short-sighted, as it omits the fact that their labor is of high quality. That U.S. corporations are resisting attempts to curtail high-tech immigration is an illustration of the great overall value of these immigrants to the U.S. economy. Bill Gates was recently quoted as saying that the primary factor limiting his company's growth is its ability to find and hire talented people. Far from being "unable to sustain the existing pool of high-tech talent," our economy is in large part dependent for its health on the availability of such talent. The IEEE is an international, not a patriotic, organization. It would be dishonest to reject foreign immigration while simultaneously seeking to expand international membership and cooperation. In any case, patriotism does not consist of keeping foreigners out. Such attitudes are obviously not new to this day, but were mostly overcome in the past by our dire need for both skill and muscle to fuel our growth. This need is just as pronounced now as it ever was. Finally, IEEE should not be used for the protection of members from competition, foreign or otherwise. It is a technical organization whose primary purpose should be the advancement of technical excellence, not the protection or promotion of mediocrity, of whatever nationality. An individual member's skill, knowledge and reasonable wage demands are his or her best protection against competition by others. The IEEE should investigate what the bulk of its membership think of this issue, not just a few disgruntled individuals. At the moment, I see no sign that the opinions of those who ultimately pay the IEEE's bills are being seriously sought, let alone considered, except as an afterthought. With regards, Bob Weaver --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ROBERT D. WEAVER rweaver@aludra.usc.edu (818)286-2987 KE6LAH Graduate student (obj. Masters+PhD) - El. Engr. - Communication Sciences University of Southern California - EEB 110 - (213)740-7527 Private pilot/SEL/Instrument airplane IEEE member WWW URL: http://www-scf.usc.edu/~rweaver/ PGP fingerprint: 9C62C63757334732 A81E4ACD201A4ECD (finger for public key)