Counterplans Inuit Consult cp



Download 0.65 Mb.
Page3/17
Date19.10.2016
Size0.65 Mb.
#3978
1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   ...   17

H1B Visas CP

1NC

Text: The United States federal government should increase the cap on H1-B visas.




Counterplan solves science diplomacy – bolsters scientific cooperation


Pickering and Agre 2010, ( Ambassador Thomas R. Pickering served as under secretary of State from 1997 to 2000 and chairs the advisory council of the Civilian Research and Development Foundation. Dr. Peter Agre, director of the Johns Hopkins Malaria Research Institute and president of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, won the 2003 Nobel Prize in chemistry. They are among the signers of a bipartisan statement by the Partnership for a Secure America on the use of science in American diplomacy, “More opportunities needed for U.S. researchers to work with foreign counterparts”, [ http://articles.baltimoresun.com/2010-02-09/news/bal-op.northkorea0209_1_science-and-technology-north-korea-scientists-and-engineers ] , //hss-RJ)

In 1979, a science and technology agreement between the United States and China paved the way for bilateral scientific cooperation that continues to benefit American science and society more broadly. Now, science diplomacy may help America open a door toward improved relations with Pyongyang, too. In December, six Americans representing leading scientific organizations sat down with their North Korean counterparts. The meeting took place on the heels of U.S. Special Envoy Stephen Bosworth's first official bilateral meeting with North Korea. Science, an international enterprise that relies on a lively exchange of ideas and data, can help build trust and expand understanding when government-to-government contacts may be strained. The North Korea visit, plus the first-ever U.S. science envoys, represent a fine beginning to a new era of international research cooperation. But the White House, the State Department and Congress must do far more to bolster science diplomacy. In particular, the U.S. government should quickly and significantly increase the number of H1-B visas being approved for specialized foreign workers such as doctors, scientists and engineers. Their contributions are critical to improving human welfare as well as our economy. Foreign scientists working or studying in U.S. universities also become informal goodwill ambassadors for America globally -- an important benefit in the developing world, where senior scientists and engineers often enter national politics. More broadly, we urgently need to expand and deepen links between the U.S. and foreign scientific communities to advance solutions to common challenges . Climate change, sustainable development, pandemic disease, malnutrition, protection for oceans and wildlife, national security and innovative energy technologies all demand solutions that draw on science and technology. Fortunately, U.S. technological leadership is admired worldwide, suggesting a way to promote dialogue with countries where we otherwise lack access and leverage. A June 2004 Zogby International poll commissioned by the Arab American Institute found that only 11 percent of Moroccans surveyed had a favorable overall view of the United States -- but 90 percent had a positive view of U.S. science and technology. Only 15 percent of Jordanians had a positive overall view, but 83 percent registered admiration for U.S. science and technology. Similarly, Pew polling data from 43 countries show that favorable views of U.S. science and technology exceed overall views of the United States by an average of 23 points. The recent mission to North Korea exemplified the vast potential of science for U.S. diplomacy. Within the scientific community, after all, journals routinely publish articles co-written by scientists from different nations, and scholars convene frequent conferences to extend those ties. Science demands an intellectually honest atmosphere, peer review and a common language for professional discourse. Basic values of transparency, vigorous inquiry and respectful debate are all inherent to science. Nations that cooperate on science strengthen the same values that support peaceful conflict resolution and improved public safety. U.S. and Soviet nongovernmental organizations contributed to a thaw in the Cold War through scientific exchanges, with little government support other than travel visas. The U.S. government is off to a good start in leveraging science diplomacy, with 43 bilateral umbrella science and technology agreements now in force. The Obama administration further elevated science engagement, beginning with the president's June speech in Cairo. Then, in November, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton appointed three science envoys to foster new partnerships and address common challenges, especially within Muslim-majority countries. She also announced the Global Technology and Innovation Fund, through which the Overseas Private Investment Corporation will spur private-sector investments in science and technology industries abroad. These steps are commendable, but the White House and the State Department need to exercise even greater leadership to build government capacity and partnerships that advance U.S. science diplomacy globally. Congress should lead as well, with greater recognition of science engagement and increased funding for science capacity-building. Both chambers must work together to give the executive branch the resources it needs. In an era of complex global challenges, science diplomacy is a critical tool for U.S. foreign policy. The opportunity to strengthen that tool and advance our diplomatic goals should not be missed.

2NC Solvency

Counterplan solves science diplomacy – bolsters international cooperation and capitalizes on global popularity of American science


Turekein and Lord 2009, (Vaughn Turekian is Chief International Officer and Director of the Center For Science Diplomacy at the American Association for the Advancement of Science. Kristin Lord is a Vice President at the Center for a New American Security and a Nonresident Fellow of the Brookings Institution, “The Science of Diplomacy”, [ http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2009/05/04/the_science_of_diplomacy ] , //hss-RJ)

Last week, U.S. President Barack Obama announced his 20-person Council of Advisors on Science and Technology, a group including two Nobel laureates. He also proclaimed his intention to increase scientific research spending to 3 percent of GDP, $70 billion more per year. The news prolonged Obama's honeymoon with U.S. scientists, spurred by his senior-level appointments of highly respected specialists such as Dr. John Holdren and Dr. Steven Chu as well as his re-legalization of stem cell research in his first days in office. As he recommits resources to this most important field, Obama must remember that science and technology have tremendous applications in and effects on the world of foreign policy as well. Given the United States' predominance in technology, engineering, health, and innovation, other countries want to engage with and benefit from the United States' ideas and products. Still, past U.S. governments have not taken full advantage of the power and potential of science to improve foreign affairs and make a safer, healthier world. To engage in science diplomacy -- defined here as scientific cooperation and engagement with the explicit intent of building positive relationships with foreign governments and societies -- Obama should do the following. Think strategically. Scientific cooperation can be a fruitful and apolitical way to engage countries where diplomatic relations are strained. For example, the U.S. National Academy of Sciences has sponsored scientific exchanges with Iran for the last several years. As part of these exchanges, young Iranians enthusiastically welcome visits from U.S. thinkers like Nobel laureate in physics Joseph Taylor. Scientists work together on issues of mutual interest such as public health and earthquake preparedness. A nascent effort at science diplomacy is now underway in Syria, which recently welcomed a high-level visit of U.S. scientists and educators. The delegation met for over an hour with President Bashar al-Assad, himself a medical doctor, to discuss potential areas of cooperation outside the realm of politics. Think offensively as well as defensively. Current policies regarding international cooperation often restrict access to U.S. technologies -- keeping nuclear weapons out of the hands of terrorists, for instance. But such defensive policies should be matched with better offensive policies: bringing the world's best scientists and scientific businesses into the United States and sending American scientists out to aid the world more often. To this end, the United States should provide visas and scholarships to usher talented students into American universities and dramatically increase the number of H-1B visas, which admit specialized workers such as doctors and physicists. The United States should also send more professionals to aid in conducting disease surveillance, developing clean energy technologies, facilitating environmental adaptation, and providing early warning of impending natural disasters. Think about people -- not just governments. Foreign publics admire American science and technology far more than they admire America. Indeed, an analysis of Pew polling data from 43 countries shows that favorable views of American science and technology exceed overall views of the United States by an average of 23 points. This presents the United States with a public diplomacy opportunity: to remind foreign people of what they like about the United States and to highlight constructive partnerships between Americans and foreign scientists, engineers, doctors, and technology business leaders. As a first step, the U.S. government should publicize successful partnerships with other countries and the relevant accomplishments of Americans. This means trumpeting Bill Gates as much as government officials and naming Nobel laureates like Egyptian-American chemist Ahmed Zewail as goodwill ambassadors. It means exposing the thousands of U.S.-government-sponsored scientific visitors to American society and politics, not just science. Facing a complex set of foreign-policy challenges, the United States can no longer afford to overlook such a useful instrument of statecraft. Regrettably, the U.S. government is not well organized to take advantage of science diplomacy. The National Science Foundation and technical departments (Energy, Agriculture, Health and Human Services, and Defense) apply their resources to science -- but not to its diplomatic use. Thus, the Obama administration should appoint a senior-level ambassador for science and technology cooperation in the State Department. He or she could convene an interagency group coordinating the strategic use of science diplomacy. But importantly, the Obama administration must change current approaches. Foreign-policy leaders -- especially Secretary of State Hillary Clinton -- must recognize the power of this means of engagement. The United States has emphasized in past weeks its commitment to the globally shared goals of healthier populations, a cleaner environment, safer societies, and a better life for all. Recognizing the potential of science diplomacy will certainly help maximize the United States' realization of these goals.

Raising visas solve science diplomacy – bolsters innovation and communication


USHR Hearing 2013, (U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Science, Space, and Technology Subcommittee on Oversight HEARING CHARTER, witnesses include Dr. Charles M. Vest, President, National Academy of Engineering; Dr. Larry Wortzel, Commissioner, U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission; Hon. Michelle Van Cleave, Senior Fellow, Homeland Security Policy Institute, George Washington University; Mr. David G. Major, Founder and President, The Centre for Counterintelligence and Security Studies, “Espionage Threats at Federal Laboratories: Balancing Scientific Cooperation while Protecting Critical Information”, [ http://docs.house.gov/meetings/SY/SY21/20130516/100836/HHRG-113-SY21-20130516-SD002.pdf ] , //hss-RJ)

Science is a worldwide endeavor. In 2008, American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) Chief Executive Officer Alan I. Leshner testified before this Committee that, “Science is by definition global in scope and application - it knows no borders, is not constrained by geography, and no one country has a monopoly on it.”4 In March 2011, Bo Cooper, former General Counsel to the then-Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS), testified before the House Judiciary Committee that, “Throughout our history, our country has operated on the principle that the more brain power we can attract from around the world, the more creativity, invention, and growth we can achieve here at home.” A Harvard Business School study found that the number of inventions, as measured by patents, increased when H-1B visa caps were higher due to “the direct contributions of immigrant inventors.”6 Though the numbers have declined during the current economic downturn, immigrants with advanced degrees still comprise a considerable percentage of U.S. workers in science and engineering occupations. At the doctoral degree level, about half of U.S. workers in computer and mathematical sciences and in engineering are foreign-born. 7 Aside from sparking innovation and entrepreneurship, foreign scholars make significant contributions to the American economy. The Association of International Educators estimates that international students and their dependents contributed approximately $21.8 billion to the American economy during the 2011-2012 academic year. This figure is based on an analysis of tuition, enrollment figures, living expenses and other associated costs.8 International scientific cooperation and openness to international students also serves longstanding and important U.S. foreign policy goals by fostering communication and cooperation among nations to promote greater global peace, prosperity and stability.

AT: Wage Turn

Their wages arguments are based on poor studies – new evidence proves that increased visas boost the US economy and don’t trade off with American jobs.


Sunil Mithas and Henry C. Lucas, Jr., assistant professor and Department Chair at the Robert H. Smith School of Business at University of Maryland, May 2010, Management Science, p.762
Our findings have important policy and managerial implications. From a policy perspective, this study suggests that, contrary to popular belief, non-U.S. citizen IT professionals are not paid less compared to American IT professionals. More broadly, the evidence in this study provides indirect evidence that visa and immigration policies so far have not had any adverse impact on the wages of American IT professionals due to any relatively lower compensation of foreign IT professionals. Comparisons of average salaries or those based on the compensation information in LCA petitions, which do not adequately adjust for educational qualifications, work experience, or institutional factors associated with American or foreign professionals, can lead to wrong conclusions. The current study, using actual salary data from IT professionals, suggests that calls for making visa policies more restrictive to protect American professionals and to prevent exploitation of foreign professionals need to be examined more carefully. Although some instances of potential abuse can not be ruled out for any policy, an appropriate and prudent policy response for any allegations of visa abuse should be commensurate with the seriousness of the actual abuse. Setting visa caps higher is perhaps less damaging than setting them too low because, if the economy does not need foreign professionals, then these visa caps will remain underutilized, as happened from 2001–2003. On the other hand, policies that restrict the supply of highly skilled professionals for U.S. firms may force U.S. companies to hire professionals overseas, thus defeating the very rationale invoked for reactive policy responses (Lewin et al. 2009, Thibodeau 2008). This phenomenon may already be occurring because the number of IT professionals hired by companies like IBM and Accenture in India in recent times far exceeds the number of IT professionals with H-1B or other work visas on their payroll.11 By the end of 2007, IBM had more than 70,000 employees in India, and Accenture was slated to have more employees in India than in the United States (Giridhardas 2007). More importantly, restrictive visa policies, to the extent they lead to reverse migration and thus potential loss of skills, innovation, and entrepreneurship of foreign-born IT professionals, particularly those who acquired higher education in U.S. universities (Wadhwa 2009), can also hurt the long-term competitiveness of U.S. firms and the U.S. economy.



Download 0.65 Mb.

Share with your friends:
1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   ...   17



The database is protected by copyright ©ininet.org 2024
send message
    Main page
foreign ministers
present form