[Senate Hearing 118-146]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]


                                                        S. Hrg. 118-146

                     UNLOCKING AMERICA'S POTENTIAL:
                 HOW IMMIGRATION FUELS ECONOMIC GROWTH
                     AND OUR COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE

=======================================================================

                                HEARING

                               BEFORE THE

                        COMMITTEE ON THE BUDGET
                          UNITED STATES SENATE

                    ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS

                             FIRST SESSION
                               __________

                           September 13, 2023
                               __________

           Printed for the use of the Committee on the Budget
           

                  [GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]           


                            www.govinfo.gov
                               __________

                    U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
                    
53-785                     WASHINGTON : 2024                               



                        COMMITTEE ON THE BUDGET

               SHELDON WHITEHOUSE, Rhode Island, Chairman
PATTY MURRAY, Washington             CHARLES E. GRASSLEY, Iowa
RON WYDEN, Oregon                    MIKE CRAPO, Idaho
DEBBIE STABENOW, Michigan            LINDSEY O. GRAHAM, South Carolina
BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont             RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin
MARK R. WARNER, Virginia             MITT ROMNEY, Utah
JEFF MERKLEY, Oregon                 ROGER MARSHALL, Kansas
TIM KAINE, Virginia                  MIKE BRAUN, Indiana
CHRIS VAN HOLLEN, Maryland           JOHN KENNEDY, Louisiana
BEN RAY LUJAN, New Mexico            RICK SCOTT, Florida
ALEX PADILLA, California             MIKE LEE, Utah

                   Dan Dudis, Majority Staff Director
        Kolan Davis, Republican Staff Director and Chief Counsel
                   Mallory B. Nersesian, Chief Clerk 
                  Alexander C. Scioscia, Hearing Clerk


                            C O N T E N T S

                              ----------                              

                     WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 13, 2023
                OPENING STATEMENTS BY COMMITTEE MEMBERS

                                                                   Page
Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, Chairman.............................     1
    Prepared Statement...........................................    36
Senator Charles E. Grassley, Ranking Member......................     3
    Prepared Statement...........................................    38
Senator Alex Padilla.............................................     5
    Prepared Statement...........................................    41
Senator Mike Lee.................................................     7
    Prepared Statement...........................................    45

                    STATEMENTS BY COMMITTEE MEMBERS

Senator Mike Braun...............................................    22
Senator Ben Ray Lujan............................................    25
Senator Lindsey O. Graham........................................    26
Senator Rick Scott...............................................    29

                               WITNESSES

Dr. Britta Glennon, Assistant Professor of Management, Wharton 
  School of University of Pennsylvania, and Faculty Research 
  Fellow, National Bureau of Economic Research...................    10
    Prepared Statement...........................................    48
Mr. David Bier, Associate Director of Immigration Studies, Cato 
  Institute......................................................    11
    Prepared Statement...........................................    76
Mr. Laurens Van Beek, Software Developer and Former U.S. Visa 
  Holder.........................................................    13
    Prepared Statement...........................................    94
Mr. Robert Rector, Senior Research Fellow, Center for Health and 
  Welfare Policy, The Heritage Foundation........................    15
    Prepared Statement...........................................   101
Dr. Ronil Hira, Associate Professor, Department of Political 
  Science, Howard University.....................................    16
    Prepared Statement...........................................   118

                                APPENDIX

Responses to post-hearing questions for the Record
    Mr. Bier.....................................................   128
    Mr. Rector...................................................   129
    Dr. Hira.....................................................   130
Charts submitted by Chairman Sheldon Whitehouse..................   132
Documents submitted for the Record by Senator Charles E. Grassley   134
Statement submitted for the Record by AFL-CIO....................   144
Statement submitted for the Record by Improve the Dream..........   152
Statement submitted for the Record by Refugees International.....   233

 
 UNLOCKING AMERICA'S POTENTIAL: HOW IMMIGRATION FUELS ECONOMIC GROWTH 
                     AND OUR COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE

                              ----------                              


                           SEPTEMBER 13, 2023

                                           Committee on the Budget,
                                                       U.S. Senate,
                                                    Washington, DC.
    The hearing was convened, pursuant to notice, at 10:00 
a.m., in the Dirksen Senate Office Building, Room SD-608, Hon. 
Sheldon Whitehouse, Chairman of the Committee, presiding.
    Present: Senators Whitehouse, Kaine, Van Hollen, Lujan, 
Padilla, Grassley, Graham, Johnson, Braun, R. Scott, and Lee.
    Also present: Democratic Staff: Dan Dudis, Majority Staff 
Director; Melissa Kaplan-Pistiner, General Counsel; Dan RuBoss, 
Senior Tax and Economic Advisor and Member Outreach Director.
    Republican Staff: Krisann Pearce, General Counsel; Ryan 
Flynn, Staff Assistant.
    Witnesses:
    Dr. Britta Glennon, Assistant Professor of Management, 
Wharton School of University of Pennsylvania, and Faculty 
Research Fellow, National Bureau of Economic Research
    Mr. David Bier, Associate Director of Immigration Studies, 
Cato Institute
    Mr. Laurens Van Beek, Software Developer and Former U.S. 
Visa Holder
    Mr. Robert Rector, Senior Research Fellow, Center for 
Health and Welfare Policy, The Heritage Foundation
    Dr. Ronil Hira, Associate Professor, Department of 
Political Science, Howard University

          OPENING STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN WHITEHOUSE \1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Prepared statement of Chairman Whitehouse appears in the 
appendix on page 36.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Chairman Whitehouse. Good morning everyone. Welcome to the 
first post-recess hearing of the Budget Committee. This one is 
a little bit unique in that I am co-chairing it with Senator 
Padilla, and it will be--I don't know if co-Ranking Member is a 
verb, but our distinguished Ranking Member will be supported by 
Senator Lee as an opener also. We will have, rather than the 
usual two opening statements, we will have four opening 
statements.
    And I want to thank Senator Padilla for his emphasis on 
this issue, and his support for this hearing. This morning we 
discussed the role that immigration plays in driving our 
economic growth, and strengthening our global competitive 
advantage. Ahead of this year's House driven default crisis, 
Ranking Member Grassley called on both parties to get serious 
about the budget deficits and debt.
    As this Committee has repeatedly shown, we have levers at 
our disposal to reduce the deficit, and more importantly, to 
reduce the debt to GDP ratio. For example, we can increase 
revenues by fixing our corrupted Tax Code, and we can avoid 
future increased expenditures, and decreased revenues by 
investing now in climate change protections.
    Showering tax cuts on the wealthy, and on big MAGA donors, 
and on big oil, are in my view not serious pathways to fiscal 
responsibility. Today's hearing discusses the powerful tool in 
our tool kit, and that is immigration. Economists and experts 
agree that expanding lawful immigration pathways to the U.S. 
will grow our workforce, our productivity, and our economy. 
Reforming our decades old immigration laws is long overdue.
    Congress has been trying to reform the system for the 
entire time that I've been in the U.S. Senate. In the 11 years 
since creating the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals 
(DACA) program, we have not yet passed permanent protections 
for Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors 
(DREAMers), whose fate now lies with the Supreme Court. Real 
human consequences to this delay play out in the lives of 
immigrants, their families, employers and communities.
    People are frightened, and people are suffering. This 
includes people seeking refuge and safety. This includes many 
essential workers, and, as one of our witnesses today will 
testify, this includes people who grew up here, built a life 
here, and then had to give it all up when our immigration laws 
failed them.
    There are also serious economic consequences. A landmark 
study on the economics of immigration by the National Academy 
of Sciences found unequivocally that immigration is integral to 
America's economic growth. At all skill levels, and at all 
education levels, immigrants boost our economy.
    Immigrants are about 80 percent more likely to start a 
business than those born in the U.S., and immigrant 
entrepreneurs create jobs for U.S. born workers. More than one 
in five small businesses in the U.S. is immigrant owned, and 
more than 40 percent of Fortune 500 companies were founded by 
an immigrant, or the child of an immigrant.
    Immigrants are also more likely to hold patents that fuel 
innovation nationwide. Notably, innovation accelerates among 
U.S. born and immigrant workers alike when immigration 
increases. Further, undocumented workers help fuel our economy. 
Providing pathways to lawful immigration and citizenship is not 
only a moral imperative, it is an economic one.
    An estimated three-quarters of all undocumented immigrants 
were essential workers during the pandemic. In other words, 
they were heroes. Their economic contributions would be even 
greater, and their risks of exploitation and labor abuse 
greatly reduced if lawful status were accorded to them. The 
Center for American Progress estimated that creating pathways 
to citizenship for DREAMers and Temporary Protected Status 
(TPS) holders, farm workers and essential workers, would boost 
U.S. Gross Domestic Product (GDP) by $1.7 trillion over ten 
years, and would create over 400,000 new jobs.
    Providing lawful status to undocumented workers also 
benefits U.S. born workers, by increasing worker power and 
reducing wage exploitation. A rising tide lifts all boats. 
Economic growth is a product of labor force growth, and 
productivity growth. Immigrants are important to both, and they 
have become essential to meeting existing labor needs, and to 
the continued health of our social insurance programs, as the 
Congressional Budget Office (CBO) Director testified in July.
    If 2 million more immigrants came to the U.S. each year we 
could reverse our predicted population and productivity 
decline, and we could nearly double GDP to $47 trillion by 
2050, compared to a GDP of only $33 trillion in a low 
immigration scenario.
    If we are serious about global economic competition with 
China, then we need to welcome immigrants. U.S. immigration 
hurdles are motivating businesses to hire workers to facilities 
abroad, instead of in their U.S. facilities. The talent crew is 
global, and America needs to attract global talent to the U.S. 
Experts have warned that without boosting legal immigration 
significantly now, the U.S. will sacrifice its position as the 
world's largest economy by 2030.
    Our outdated and broken immigration system is harming 
people, and it is also harming our economy and affecting our 
budget. Repairing it will expand our economic potential, and 
strengthen our global competitiveness. We can fix this, and we 
should try. I turn it over now to Ranking Member Grassley, 
whose opening statement will be followed by that of Senator 
Padilla, whose opening statement will be followed, if he is 
present, by Senator Lee. Senator Grassley.

           OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR GRASSLEY \2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Prepared statement of Senator Grassley appears in the appendix 
on page 38.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Senator Grassley. Before I go to my statement, I should 
probably make clear because my statement might sound like I 
have great disagreement with you, but everything you've said 
about legal immigration, I want to say that I associate myself 
with your remarks, and the only thing is what keeps us from 
getting there is more of a political issue that I think I want 
to address.
    Chairman Whitehouse. And indeed you and I, and particularly 
Senator Graham have been heavily involved in Judiciary 
Committee immigration work for many years, so yeah, I agree 
with you there. Thank you. Please go ahead.
    Senator Grassley. Over the August break I completed my 
annual tour of Iowa for the 43rd straight year. I held at least 
one Q and A meeting in each of Iowa's 99 counties. These 
meetings allow me to hear directly from my fellow Iowans about 
what's on their minds, and as an example I listen to people, 
what's on their minds.
    The father of Mr. Van Beek, who's here as a witness, came 
to my Columbus Junction meeting maybe about two or three years 
ago, and talked about the very same issues that I presume Mr. 
Van Beek will speak to us about today, although it will 
probably be a little more general of a statement.
    Immigration is an issue on the minds of many Iowans, 
specifically illegal immigration, and securing our nation's 
borders. And when our borders are not secured, I think the 
sovereignty of any nation is compromised. Every night on our 
TVs we see immigrants wading across the Rio Grande. We see 
immigrants sleeping on streets in New York City, and reports of 
similar situations in Chicago and Los Angeles.
    As he criticized the Biden administration, the Democrat 
Mayor of New York City recently said this crisis will cost New 
York 12 billion dollars, and destroy the City. In fact, just 
this Saturday New York Mayor warned all City agencies could see 
their budgets cut by 15 percent due to an increased cost of 
migrant crisis.
    So even Democrats who have actually dealt with the crisis, 
admit illegal immigration is a huge cost to taxpayers and 
society. And it seems to me I don't hear from those same mayors 
that it would be a good thing if the President would solve this 
problem at the border by securing the border because President 
Biden's lax immigration enforcement has contributed to rising 
crime in communities across the country.
    Gangs at the southwest border recruit migrants to bring 
drugs into the United States, those on terrorism watch list 
have been apprehended at the border, and who knows how many 
have evaded apprehension. In Iowa, Sara Root was killed in 2016 
by an undocumented immigrant driving drunk.
    New York City's budget cuts could result in no overtime for 
City police, and put public safety even more at risk. No one 
can place a cost on the lives of families that have been 
destroyed by criminals entering our country illegally. These 
are very real reasons the Biden administration needs to step up 
and control our borders.
    Iowans tell me they're sick and tired of the administration 
not enforcing our immigration laws. We need real reform and 
consistent enforcement of our existing immigration laws. 
President Biden took an oath to enforce our nation's laws, and 
yet he's not doing that on the subject of immigration.
    We're a nation of immigrants. We're the most liberal on 
this issue of any nation on the face of our globe. America 
welcomed roughly 1.5 million legal immigrants in the year of 
2022. These folks followed our immigration laws to their 
benefit, and to the benefit of our communities as well.
    Businesses and our economies benefit from a stable and 
legal workforce. Our communities benefit from the economic 
contribution of legal immigrants, and the immigrants benefit 
from the opportunities and protections offered when they're 
here legally. We all benefit when, state, federal and local 
resources are not drained dealing with people entering our 
country illegally.
    No one benefits from mismanaged borders, policies that 
incentivize illegal immigration, and poor implementation of 
legal immigration programs. My Democrat colleagues argue that 
we need to increase immigration to address a labor shortage. 
Well one reason we have a labor shortage is this 
Administration's anti-work agenda.
    A recent study by the Foundation of Government 
Accountability found President Biden's expansion of government 
program benefits has caused 2.4 million Americans to leave 
work. We need to bring Americans back into the workforce, and 
reform existing programs before we expand immigration.
    This morning we'll hear from Mr. Robert Rector. He's 
tracked the cost of illegal immigration for many years. He'll 
discuss how Biden Administration mismanagement of our 
immigration system has imposed significant financial costs upon 
our towns, states, and federal governments.
    His testimony will make it clear that relaxing our 
immigration requirements is unsustainable, and the wrong 
direction to take. We'll also hear from Dr. Ron Hira about the 
fraud and abuse of the current H-1B visa program. His message 
will be we know the steps needed to improve our current legal 
immigration programs, and we must take those steps to protect 
American workers and foreign born workers as well as our 
economy.
    During this past year Senator Durbin and I reintroduced the 
bipartisan H-1B and L1 Visa Reform Act to reform and close 
loopholes in the H-1B and L1 visa program. The H-1B and L1 visa 
program creates a pathway for U.S. companies to recruit highly 
skilled non-citizens when there is a shortage of qualified 
workers in the country.
    Unfortunately, these programs are being abused, mismanaged 
by a number of companies who displace U.S. workers. Our 
legislation, meaning Grassley/Durbin legislation would reduce 
fraud and abuse in our immigration system, provide American 
workers protections against being displaced, and protect 
foreign workers from being subjected to artificially depressed 
wages and poor working conditions.
    Before we entertain any increases in these programs, they 
have to be fixed. Thank you Mr. Chairman.
    Chairman Whitehouse. Thanks very much Senator Grassley, and 
now I will turn to Senator Padilla who, as I indicated in my 
early opening remarks, was a terrific support and instigator 
for this hearing, and I look forward to his opening remarks, 
and then we'll turn to Senator Lee.

            OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR PADILLA \3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Prepared statement of Senator Padilla appears in the appendix 
on page 41.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Senator Padilla. Thank you, Chairman Whitehouse. Always 
happy to instigate. Thank you Ranking Member Grassley. I thank 
both of you for inviting me to help co-chair this hearing. The 
role that immigration plays in driving economic growth, and 
ensuring that our nation stays competitive on the global stage.
    I'm glad to be here today to learn more about the economic 
challenges caused by our outdated and broken immigration 
system, and the steps that we might take, that we should take, 
to make our system and our country stronger moving forward.
    Now even in the year 2023, it's no exaggeration to say that 
America remains a shining city upon a hill to countless people 
around the world who dream of a better life. But make no 
mistake, it's not just immigrants who rely on the United States 
of America to achieve a better future, America too relies on 
immigrants.
    Our economic success will continue to depend on immigrants 
and all that they contribute to our nation. If all that 
immigrants contribute, Congress has failed to pass significant 
immigration legislation to update our outdated immigration 
system in over three decades. As the Senator from the state 
that is home to more immigrants than any state in the nation, 
and yes, a proud son of immigrants myself, I know personally 
the benefits that immigrants bring to our country, and to our 
communities.
    And as Chair of the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on 
Immigration, I just want to share with my colleagues on this 
Committee, that we've now had six hearings examining the vital 
roles that immigrants play in our communities, from members of 
the military, to essential workers on the front lines of the 
pandemic, and long before then, to entrepreneurs and more. But 
over the course of those hearings too many times we've heard 
the devastating impacts that our outdated laws have had. The 
impact that growing visa backlogs have had on families, on 
students, on workers, seeking to immigrate to the United 
States. That includes U.S. citizen family members who are 
separated or kept apart from loved ones because of our outdated 
immigration system.
    Here's what we've learned. Every day that we fail to reform 
our immigration system is another day that we're holding back 
the economy, and another day that our economic competitors 
around the world rise. According to Forward.US, meaningful 
immigration reform could bring 3.2 million new jobs to the 
United States over the next decade, and add a trillion dollars 
to our economy.
    And we're here today, part of that reform means 
facilitating immigration of healthcare providers like 
physicians and nurses. Today, the United States is facing a 
dire healthcare workforce shortage, including a projected 
shortage of up to 124,000 physicians by 2034.
    But luckily, we know that immigrant healthcare workers can 
help fill this gap. We know it because in many ways they 
already are. Immigrants already write our prescriptions, they 
care for us at our bedside, and very often they're the 
cornerstone for rural and low-income community access to 
healthcare. Yet backlogs and processing green cards, along with 
annual caps to employment-based visas, mean we can't meet the 
high demand for healthcare workers in the United States.
    For my colleagues across the aisle, let's be clear. This is 
lawful migration, existing programs. We're talking about 
addressing backlogs. Now we can't meet our needs unless we act. 
Strengthening our economy also means helping immigrants who 
hope to make a career for themselves here in science, 
technology, engineering, and math (STEM) fields, filling a 
desperately needed gap in our STEM workforce.
    It means helping potential entrepreneurs and business 
owners, yes investors who whether because of restrictive 
students, or employment based visas, are forced to leave the 
country, or never get a chance to contribute to our economy. 
And it means passing a pathway to citizenship for long-term 
undocumented individuals like DREAMers and DACA recipients, 
hundreds of thousands of young people who are already home in 
America, but who can't pursue the same opportunities as their 
peers because of their status.
    How can we live up to our full economic potential when all 
these people are denied a secure place in America? And let me 
be clear about this, the need for immigrants in our economy 
stretches far beyond just the healthcare examples that I've 
given, or the STEM fields examples that I've given. They're 
essentially in every essential industry, from agriculture to 
education, construction, food processing, and more.
    In fact, we recognized this during the COVID-19 pandemic, 
nearly 1 in 5 jobs deemed essential by the United States 
government was held by an immigrant. Yet these same workers 
deemed essential to keeping our country running, are denied 
permanent protections. They're left to live in limbo. That's 
fundamentally wrong.
    And it's not just a moral failure, it's a national economic 
weakness as well. But it's indicative of the larger problem 
that we have, that we will try to square off with today. We 
have the solutions to grow our economy, and be more competitive 
on the world stage. Time and again the solutions have been 
there. But politics has kept Congress from taking the necessary 
actions.
    To fail to act again would not just cause the United States 
to fall behind here at home, we would continue to lose our 
competitive edge globally as well. So we must come to the 
table, work to bring justice and dignity back to the 
immigration system, provide stability for immigrants living 
here in America already, and invest in the future of our 
economy.
    That may seem like a lot to ask, but failure is not an 
option. So I challenge all of us here today to listen to the 
testimony of our witnesses, look past the partisan talking 
points, and let's get to work. We can do this. We need to do 
this, and thank you again Mr. Chair for having this hearing 
today, and thank you.
    Chairman Whitehouse. Senator Lee.

              OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR LEE \4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Prepared statement of Senator Lee appears in the appendix on 
page 45.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Senator Lee. Thank you, Chairman Whitehouse, and Ranking 
Member Grassley, for the opportunity to address the Committee 
with a few opening remarks at today's important hearing. 
America is a generous country, welcoming to immigrants. It 
always has been, and I hope it always will be.
    My home state of Utah is an excellent example of that 
generosity and welcoming spirit that's come to typify America. 
Tragically, as much as we would love to, America cannot be the 
safe harbor for every desperate, destitute and wandering soul 
in the world.
    Under this Administration the bounds of American generosity 
has been more than tested. It's been assaulted, stretched to 
the breaking point. The cost of an unsecured border and 
unprecedented illegal immigration have been both stunning and 
debilitating.
    The cost of the border crisis is impacting every single 
American. It isn't just placing unprecedented strain on our 
federal budget, and the budgets of border states. Governors 
across America, and mayors of cities large and small, are 
feeling the burden of an unprecedented 3 million people 
entering this country illegally, and relying almost exclusively 
on many instances, on taxpayer resources for their support.
    But first and foremost, we must acknowledge the human costs 
of our unwillingness to close our border and enforce our laws. 
People are dying in cargo containers. Children, including 
babies, are being trafficked as commodities, as the price of 
admission into our country. Women and children are being 
violated, trafficked in the human sex trade.
    Violent drug cartels meanwhile are being enriched and 
becoming increasingly powerful as they traffic untold amounts 
of fentanyl into our country. Over 100,000 people have died 
from fentanyl overdoses during the last year alone, and there's 
no dispute about where the fentanyl is entering our country. 
It's coming through our southern border.
    And estimated 196 Americans are dying every single day from 
fentanyl. As the Washington Post pointed out, that's the 
equivalent of a fully loaded Boeing 757 200 crashing and 
killing everyone on board day after day, after day every day of 
the year. Now if Secretary Mayorkas and President Biden had a 
Boeing 757 crashing every day in American air space, everyone 
would be understandably outraged, calling for their resignation 
of both officials.
    Not only is the fentanyl streaming through our border, 
costing American lives, but it's also placing an unsustainable 
burden on our healthcare system. Now while the human costs are 
certainly the most significant, they're not the only costs 
associated with our porous border. We're experiencing 
unprecedented strain on our federal, state and local resources. 
Now one border town, Yuma, Arizona, spent more than $26 million 
to provide medical care for immigrants crossing into the United 
States just last year.
    About 27 percent of the immigrant patients going there have 
come there specifically to deliver their babies in the United 
States. According to news reports, one doctor at Yuma Regional 
Medical Center said, ``The population of Yuma is 100,000. We've 
had 300,000 people cross the border in the last year, and we're 
the only hospital that they've come to.''
    I don't know how anybody can look at that and say this is a 
fair setup. He says the medical facility will never fully be 
able to recover financially. Not only does this crisis drive up 
costs for the only paying patients, generally the American 
citizens and residents of Yuma, but it's also depleted the 
hospital's resources, and its ability to care for its own 
residents.
    The doctor said, ``Migrant patients are receiving free 
care, and they have no ability to pay. We have no ability to 
bill anyone. We don't know their final destinations, and we 
don't know anything about them. We cannot provide completely 
free care to the residents of our community, so the situation 
is simply not fair, and concerning to them.''
    In El Paso, CNN reports about 2,300 illegal aliens are 
living on the streets around two shelters downtown. Now what 
happens to the citizens of El Paso when they need a helping 
hand? I guess you have to wait in line behind the 2,300 
immigrants. But it's not only the border towns that are 
suffering from this deluge of illegal immigrants. Democratic 
mayors across the country are declaring states of emergency 
because of the record number of dependent migrants flooding 
into their cities.
    Two of America's largest cities, New York City and Chicago, 
are now experiencing a small fraction of the unsustainable 
situation that border states and cities deal with every day. 
And their elected officials aren't holding back when it comes 
to complaints.
    Look, illegal immigration has occurred in the United 
States. It's occurred for a long time, and it started happening 
well before the Biden Administration to be sure, but make no 
mistake about this. The unprecedented surge in illegal border 
crossings, and the ongoing crisis of the last two and a half 
years is now being felt everywhere across the country.
    This is not an accident. This is the result of deliberate, 
willful, non-enforcement of our immigration laws. Unlawful uses 
of parole and our unwillingness to correct the perverse 
incentives built into our immigration laws. I've introduced the 
Stopping Border Surges Act, which would go a long way toward 
closing those loopholes.
    But following the laws correctly, the laws that are already 
on the books would be a great step in the right direction, and 
we could stop most of this from happening right now if we just 
enforce the laws.
    All Americans want America to be a place of refuge, but 
Americans of all leanings recognize that the ongoing crisis on 
the southern border is threatening our ability to give relief 
to true asylum seekers, and also to take care of our own 
people, and to provide an environment where people can live in 
a place of peace and law and order.
    It's my hope, my wish, my prayer, that the Biden 
Administration will reverse course on this unacceptably abysmal 
record of border enforcement, and start enforcing the law to 
bring an end to the crisis. The cost of the Biden Mayorkas 
border policies are just way too high for us to pay. Thank you, 
Mr. Chairman.
    Chairman Whitehouse. Thank you Senator Lee. Our first 
witness is Dr. Britta Glennon, a Professor of Management at the 
Wharton School of University of Pennsylvania, and a Faculty 
Research Fellow of the National Bureau of Economic Research. 
Her research examines human capital and innovation with a 
particular focus on how immigration policy affects businesses 
decision making and performance.
    Dr. Glennon, welcome. Your testimony will be followed by 
that of David Bier, he is the Associate Director of Immigration 
Studies at the Cato Institute. Mr. Bier has over a decade of 
experience in immigration policy, and his work has been cited 
widely, including by multiple appeals courts, and the U.S. 
Supreme Court.
    Mr. Bier was previously a Senior Policy Advisor for Idaho 
Congressman Raul Labrador, where he helped draft immigration 
legislation. Mr. Bier, thank you for being with us today.
    We'll also hear from Laurens Van Beek. Mr. Van Beek is a 
graduate of the University of Iowa, with a degree in computer 
science, and currently works as a software developer at 
Integrated DNA technologies. In 2022 he was forced to self-
deport, and leave his family and home of nearly two decades.
    Due to his talents, and employer's needs, his employer has 
him working now from overseas. His story exemplifies how 
forcing American raised and educated children to self-deport, 
hurts America's communities, and its economy, and I would add 
makes no sense. Mr. Van Beek, we appreciate you taking the time 
to join us.
    Then we have Dr. Ronil Hira, an Associate Professor in the 
Department of Political Science at Howard University in 
Washington, D.C. who has written widely on offshoring and 
highly skilled immigration.
    Finally, we will hear from Mr. Robert Rector, who is the 
Heritage Foundation's Senior Research Fellow with the Center 
for Health and Welfare Policy. His research focuses on welfare 
and immigration reform, and he has previously published 
analysis on the fiscal costs of immigration. I welcome all of 
you. Dr. Glennon please proceed. Five minute statements please, 
your full testimony will be made a matter of record.

    STATEMENT OF DR. BRITTA GLENNON, ASSISTANT PROFESSOR OF 
 MANAGEMENT, WHARTON SCHOOL OF UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA, AND 
 FACULTY RESEARCH FELLOW, NATIONAL BUREAU OF ECONOMIC RESEARCH 
                              \5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Prepared statement of Dr. Glennon appears in the appendix on 
page 48.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Dr. Glennon. Thank you for the opportunity to testify 
today. The primary point I want to make in my remarks is that 
the existing academic research strongly indicates that 
immigration leads to large gains in productivity, innovation, 
and business and economic growth. As a result, the current 
outdated and comparatively restrictive U.S. immigration system 
is putting the U.S. at a competitive disadvantage. When we 
restrict immigration we lose, and other countries gain instead.
    Our restrictive immigration policies have already motivated 
companies to move jobs and investment out of the U.S. For 
example, my own work shows that the 2004 reduction in H-1B visa 
cap led U.S. multi-national companies to move tens of thousands 
of jobs to the subsidiaries that they operate abroad, both at 
existing subsidiaries, and by opening brand new ones.
    In other words, the U.S.'s restrictive immigration policies 
sent jobs and investment to other countries, especially China, 
India, and Canada. In contrast, other research has shown that 
an influx of migrants and refugees leads to firm level 
onshoring of investment. Policymakers should consider that 
restrictive immigration policies, including those implemented 
to protect U.S. jobs are actually likely to have the unintended 
consequence of pushing U.S. business investment abroad.
    But our failure to reform outdated immigration laws is not 
only causing us to lose workers. We are also losing startups. 
As one example, my work has documented that immigrant would-be 
entrepreneurs in the U.S. are going to Canada instead to form 
their startups because there's no startup visa in the U.S., and 
thus no clear legal path for immigrants to found a business 
here.
    The loss of immigrant entrepreneurship to other countries 
is especially significant since recent work has found that 
immigrants of all skills levels were 80 percent more likely 
than U.S. born citizens to start a business in the U.S. 
Moreover, immigrants were more likely to start a business at 
every business size, from small mom and pop shops, all the way 
up to high growth startups.
    And these immigrant founded companies created 42 percent 
more jobs than U.S. citizen founded companies. So if immigrants 
originally destined for the U.S. instead choose to go to Canada 
for example, they end up creating new jobs for Canadians rather 
than for Americans.
    Immigrants also disproportionately, positively contribute 
to innovation, which has historically given the U.S. a 
competitive edge, relative to countries like China, that do not 
attract or permit immigrants. A recent study found that 
immigrants who account for about 14 percent of the U.S. 
population are responsible for 36 percent of aggregate 
innovation in the U.S.
    Not only do immigrants patent more than U.S. born workers, 
but they also increase U.S. born workers productivity by 13 
percentage points due to increased collaboration between U.S. 
born and immigrant workers, and the recombination of diverse 
knowledge and ideas.
    Another study turns to history for a clear example of what 
happens to American innovation when immigration flows are 
restricted. Immigration quotas in the 1920s caused a 68 percent 
decline in patenting, in large part because Americans were less 
innovative without immigrants around. We risk repeating that 
history.
    Finally, my own work shows that businesses, based in 
countries with more restrictive immigration laws are at a 
competitive disadvantage. They perform worse on average than 
firms in countries with more open immigration systems, both 
because they get less talent, and because of the lost 
collaboration between U.S. born and immigrant workers.
    But I'm not the only one to show that access to immigrants 
affects business performance. For instance, other research 
focused on startups has shown that winning the H-1B lottery 
improves the likelihood of receiving venture capital funding, 
and successfully going public.
    Similarly, when firms fail to obtain seasonal immigrant 
workers it reduces their revenue and investment. In short, the 
ability to hire immigrants of all skill levels matters a lot 
for firm innovation and performance.
    The implications of the empirical evidence are clear. When 
we choose to not reform our outdated and restrictive 
immigration system we hurt our competitiveness and economic 
dynamism, sending jobs, startups, investment and innovation to 
countries that do recognize the economic benefits that 
immigrants bring. Thank you.
    Chairman Whitehouse. Thank you very much. We turn now to 
Mr. Bier, welcome, please proceed with your statement.

  STATEMENT OF DAVID BIER, ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION 
                  STUDIES, CATO INSTITUTE \6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Prepared statement of Mr. Bier appears in the appendix on page 
76.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Mr. Bier. Chairman Whitehouse, Ranking Member Grassley, Co-
Chair Padilla and distinguished members of the Committee, thank 
you for the opportunity to testify. For nearly half a century 
the Cato Institute has produced original research showing that 
a freer, more lawful and more orderly immigration system 
benefits Americans.
    Our view is simple. People are the ultimate resource. Only 
people can transform natural resources into human resources, 
and in a free country they do just that. Immigrants are 
workers, inventors, investors, and entrepreneurs. They are 
contributors, not takers. The single most important economic 
challenge facing the United States is population decline.
    Half of America's countries are already losing population. 
Immigration alone is keeping the working age population from 
falling. By 2040 America's total population will be shrinking. 
You can't maintain infrastructure, businesses, or schools when 
consumers, parents and workers disappear. Hospitals close, 
roads erode when people don't come.
    Social security illustrates the massive scale of this 
demographic problem. The system is already short nearly 3 
million workers that it needs to keep revenues above expenses. 
By 2035 it will be 30 million, and benefits will either be cut 
by 23 percent, or more likely, taxes will go up.
    America's aging workforce is contributing to an 
unprecedented labor shortfall. Nearly 10 million jobs have 
stood open per month over the last 2.5 years, costing the U.S. 
economy nearly $2 trillion. Note that the worker shortage is 
not just about a skills gap. The Bureau of Labor Statistics 
estimates that nearly 70 percent of jobs in 2031 will not 
require a college degree.
    A thriving economy will need people of all types. 
Immigration isn't the singular answer, but it helps. It helps 
because immigrants work, expand the pie, and create new 
opportunities for Americans. According to the Cato Institute's 
2023 update of the National Academy of Sciences highly regarded 
2016 report on the fiscal effects of immigration, immigrants 
generate nearly $1 trillion in taxes, nearly $300 billion more 
than they receive in benefits.
    Moreover, immigrants who enter as young adults, have a net 
present value that is positive at every skill level over their 
lifetime. Immigrants counteract population decline, and have 
created or preserved nearly $3 trillion in housing wealth for 
American households, predominantly in areas where housing 
prices are falling or are low.
    Immigrants work at higher rates at every skill level, and 
they work with Americans, not against them. Every worker is 
part of an economic eco-system, depending on a vast army of 
other workers to make them productive. Immigrant care givers 
let U.S. parents get jobs again. Landscaping workers create 
jobs for Americans as supervisors.
    When farmers in Iowa hire workers, they purchase equipment 
that creates jobs in manufacturing in South Carolina for 
Americans. Immigrants are primarily compliments, not 
competitors. The problem is that America's immigration system 
isn't recognizing these benefits. We will next year keep out 
about 97 percent of the people trying to get green cards right 
now.
    As a result, the U.S. ranks in the bottom third of wealthy 
countries for immigrants per capita. Our situation is so bad 
that Congress isn't even trying to retain the immigrants we 
already have here right now. The 11 million or more without 
legal status, the 500 or so Afghans, Ukrainians and others with 
temporary parole status, the 600,000 DACA recipients, the 1 
million international students, the 1 million temporary skilled 
workers, and the children of those workers who lose their 
dependent status when they turn 21.
    All of these people could or would be contributing more to 
America's future if they had a permanent lawful status in this 
country. We want them to invest in this country. America is 
losing our competitive edge. We went from accounting for the 
majority of the increase in the immigrant population worldwide 
in the 1990s, to accounting for less than 7 percent of it from 
2015 to 2020.
    Few countries can simply choose their demographic destiny. 
America is the greatest country on earth, and we can choose 
that destiny, and the immigrants who come here can help keep 
America the greatest country on earth, thank you.
    Chairman Whitehouse. Thank you very much Mr. Bier. We now 
turn to Mr. Van Beek. Thank you so much for coming here and 
joining us.

 STATEMENT OF LAURENS VAN BEEK, SOFTWARE DEVELOPER AND FORMER 
                      U.S. VISA HOLDER \7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Prepared statement of Mr. Van Beek appears in the appendix on 
page 94.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Mr. Van Beek. Chairman Whitehouse, Ranking Member Grassley, 
Senator Padilla and members of the Committee. Thank you so much 
for the opportunity to share my story. My name is Laurens Van 
Beek, and I'm 26 years old. I grew up in Iowa, graduated from 
the University of Iowa, and I'm a software developer for an 
Iowa based international company.
    I'm also a member of Improve the Dream, and one of 250,000 
young immigrants who face constant barriers in our legal 
immigration system that forces young people who are brought 
here legally, raised and educated here, to leave the country 
after turning 21. I am visiting today from Belgium, as I have 
already been forced out of my home of nearly two decades.
    Despite going to great lengths to follow every letter of 
U.S. immigration law, my ability to build a future in the only 
country I call home, is obscured in red tape. And it has 
happened both as a child growing up here lawfully, and as an 
adult trying to navigate the employment-based immigration 
system.
    I was born in the Netherlands, and in 2005 when I was 7 
years old, my parents moved us to the United States in search 
of a better life after rising crime in our area. My family had 
already had deep roots in Iowa, dating back to shortly after 
World War II, when my grandmother, at age 16, started a 
correspondence with students attending a small farm school in 
Iowa City, and grew that connection over time leading to the 
Mayor of Iowa City dedicating September 9,1997 as ``Leny Van 
Beek Day'' in her honor.
    When we settled in Iowa, my dad got the opportunity to 
start his own small jewelry business in North Liberty. Having 
grown up watching my parents become welcomed members of the 
Iowa City community as they poured love and care into every 
piece of jewelry they made, I knew that this is where wanted to 
stay.
    Growing up on the farm, I have fond memories of feeding 
horses, riding through the corn fields on a four wheeler, 
picking sweet corn, and attending the Johnson County Fair with 
my family. I attended Mark Twain Elementary, where I was a 
crossing guard, having to make sure to take down and put up the 
American flag every afternoon and morning.
    While attending Iowa City High School I represented my 
school at the Iowa Model UN Conferences. I attended the 
University of Iowa, where I got my bachelor's degree in 
computer science, and immersed myself in the typical American 
campus life and student organizations. Freshman year, the first 
hurdle in my immigration status became apparent.
    To graduate, I would need to switch from my status as a 
dependent on my parent's visa, to an international student 
visa. My parents visa allows them to operate a small business, 
hire American employees and renew their status. But it does not 
have an obtainable pathway to permanent residence, or 
citizenship for them or dependents.
    So when I turned 21, I aged out. All of the years that I 
spent growing up in this country were rendered useless by our 
immigration laws, and I was treated like a brand new immigrant 
coming here for the first time. My parents could never have 
imagined that America's immigration laws would allow them to 
lawfully build lives in their local communities, while forcing 
their son to face challenges to continue staying in the country 
as an adult.
    After graduating I began working full-time for Integrated 
DNA Technologies in Coralville, Iowa. Under my F1 Optional 
Practical Training (OPT) status for college graduates, which I 
had for three years due to my STEM degree. I worked directly on 
software for the production of DNA assays with a wide range of 
medical uses, including during the height of the COVID 
pandemic.
    Despite my accomplishments, and deep ties to my community, 
I was one of thousands of STEM professionals not selected by 
the randomized visa work lottery system over three attempts in 
three years. This meant that when my OPT expired in July of 
2022, I had to self-deport, or risk being in the United States 
with an expired status.
    I had to sell my car, condense my life down to two 
suitcases, leave my friends, coworkers, community, family 
behind, leave the country that I love, and go back to the 
Netherlands, a place I hadn't even visited in the 17 years 
since leaving. It was not my home. And on July 6, 2022, I saw 
the turmoil weigh on our family as it was split apart when my 
parents waved me, their only child, off at the airport.
    I told my dad that I would make the best of the situation. 
However, deep down I knew that things could never be the same. 
My life had turned upside down and started over. Two months 
after I was forced to leave, my father was diagnosed with 
kidney cancer. I could not be with him in the time that he 
needed me most.
    Imagine being their only child, and not being able to be 
there for your parents when they have dedicated their entire 
life for the betterment of your American dream. Throughout all 
of this my employer is actively working on my return, but the 
fact that I'm coming here today from Belgium, demonstrates that 
our system has failed.
    It failed me, my family, my community and my employer. I 
now pay taxes and spend my money in Belgium, and I can't see my 
family, and my true home nearly enough. This is not what the 
founding fathers intended for America. The U.S. is my home, and 
I want to live here and contribute to my community in Iowa.
    My story isn't unique. Every year another 10,000 
individuals like me, who grew up in this country with lawful 
status are forced to leave. We are America's children. On top 
of this, thousands of other individuals are forced to take 
their talents and potentials to other countries who are happily 
welcoming them and their families.
    We need Congressional action that creates a clear, 
attainable pathway for people like me to obtain permanent 
residence. Otherwise, our country will continue to waste its 
investments, and the potential of immigrants who only want to 
help grow the country they love. The bipartisan America's 
Children Act, led by Senators Padilla and Paul would be a great 
start as it permanently fixes the problem for people like me.
    For the U.S. to continue as a global leader we cannot 
afford to squander the talents of people who have been shaped 
by American values, and want to give back to the country that 
raised them. I am and always will be an American, even if the 
paperwork tells a different story. Thank you Chairman.
    Chairman Whitehouse. Thank you very much Mr. Van Beek. Next 
is Mr. Rector, Dr. Rector. I'm sorry I'm not seeing it from 
here. Let's go to the Doctor, Mr. Rector please proceed.

STATEMENT OF ROBERT RECTOR, SENIOR RESEARCH FELLOW, CENTER FOR 
     HEALTH AND WELFARE POLICY, THE HERITAGE FOUNDATION \8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Prepared statement of Mr. Rector appears in the appendix on 
page 101.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Mr. Rector. The United States, if you look at the world, 
there are over 900 million people who would like to come and 
live in the United States, and if you think about open borders 
in that context, it's clear that open borders would transform 
the United States beyond any reasonable recognition of what it 
is.
    We have experimented with open borders now for about three 
years, and the consequences of that are very apparent, as the 
Mayor of New York just recently said that New York is facing a 
crisis across state and cities expenditures only of $6 billion 
a year.
    He said ``This is coming to a neighborhood near you. Never 
in my life have I had a problem that I did not see an ending 
to. I don't see an ending to this. This issue will destroy New 
York City. The City we knew we are about to lose.'' And that is 
a microcosm of the United States because with the open border 
immigration--illegal immigration crisis, our nation is a nation 
that we are about to lose, and it's directly a result of the 
policies implemented by President Biden.
    When Biden campaigned for the Presidency, he said he would 
urge illegal immigrants to surge to the border. A remarkable 
statement. He then has set up a policy where when they reach 
the border there is an open admission process in which almost 
all of them are automatically allowed into the states. And then 
he also promised, and has delivered that once they arrive in 
the United States, unless they commit some type of serious 
crime, there will be absolutely no deportation for them.
    This is explicitly an open borders policy even though they 
don't want to admit it. And as a result of this open borders 
policy Biden did not get his expected surge of illegal 
immigration, he has generated an absolutely tidal wave.
    In the months since Biden took office there have been 5 
million illegal immigrants who have crossed the border and 
taken up residence in the United States. This is more than 
twice the highest rate ever achieved in this before, and it is 
a result of these five million immigrants--illegal immigrants, 
entering the country.
    We now have over 15 million illegal immigrants in the 
United States, and it continues to rise, as the Mayor of New 
York said, there is no end in sight. This is a catastrophe that 
can only get larger and larger. But if the current trends 
continue, we will have within about four or five years, over 20 
million illegal immigrants residing in the United States with 
no policy other than to grant them amnesty and full access to 
the U.S. welfare system.
    And what are the consequences of this? Well fiscally 
illegal immigrants, about half of them, lack a high school 
degree historically. This means that of the 15 million we 
currently have here, the fiscal expenditures are about $150 
billion a year. They pay about $50 billion in taxes. This 
creates a deficit of $100 billion a year. What's $100 billion a 
year? That's equivalent to a 75 cent tax on every gallon of 
gasoline sold in the United States.
    The National Academy of Sciences says that this type of 
low-skilled immigrant again, with close to half of them not 
having a high school degree, cost the U.S. taxpayer, net of any 
taxes these individuals pay in, $288,000 per person per year. 
When you take the current mass of them, that is $3.8 trillion 
over the course of a lifetime--not per year, over the lifetime.
    That's $3.8 trillion for the whole mass of them over the 
course of a lifetime, and that is just the current number. This 
population is going to go up, and these costs will simply 
become higher and higher. An additional impact of this is that 
when you bring in low skill immigrants of this sort, and I have 
over 80 studies that I can provide the Committee on this, you 
bring in this type of low skill immigration, what it does is 
drive low skill American workers, particularly minority 
workers, out of the labor force and drives down their wages.
    Typically for every 10 percent increase in the low skill 
immigrant population in an employment group, the wages go down 
by about 6 percent, and we have seen in our low skill 
population largely static wages for decades now, and that is 
substantially due to the influx of low skilled workers coming 
in to compete with them.
    Milton Friedman told us we cannot have open borders in a 
welfare state. We are now experimenting with that, and we are 
finding as the Mayor of New York has found, that that was 
exactly right.
    Chairman Whitehouse. Dr. Hira please proceed.

STATEMENT OF DR. RONIL HIRA, ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR, DEPARTMENT OF 
            POLITICAL SCIENCE, HOWARD UNIVERSITY \9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ Prepared statement of Dr. Hira appears in the appendix on page 
118.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Dr. Hira. Chairman Whitehouse, Ranking Member Grassley, 
other distinguished members of the Committee, thank you for 
inviting me to testify here today. It's both a professional 
honor, but it's personally very meaningful to me. I'm the son 
of two Indian immigrants. My late mother was a physician, and 
my late father was an engineer.
    My wife is also an immigrant from India, so it has a lot of 
personal meaning to me. I want to recognize Ranking Member 
Grassley's spearheading leadership on bipartisan reforms that 
would create a skilled immigration system that's fairer to 
guest workers, immigrants, and U.S. workers alike.
    S. 979, H-1B and L1 Visa Reform Act of 2023 is co-sponsored 
by Senators Durbin and Sanders. It would yield, if passed, it 
would yield higher economic growth and reduced budget deficits. 
The title of this hearing is how immigration can fuel economic 
growth and the country's competitive advantage, but too often 
the immigration policy discussion conflates immigration, 
immigrants with guest workers.
    It's really important to make a clear distinction between 
the two. Immigrants are people who can stay in the U.S. 
permanently, whereas guest workers are temporary, non-
immigrants. Unlike immigrants, guest workers can only stay in 
the country under specific conditions, and have very limited 
rights. As a result, every time Congress creates a new guest 
worker program, or as in the case of OPT was created by the 
administrative state, you're creating a different, a distinct 
market, a different labor market that operates distinctly and 
separately from our normal labor market.
    The rules that govern these guest worker programs are 
critical because they shape how that market behaves. We have 
not spent enough time--policymakers, but also academics and 
researchers have not spent enough time scrutinizing the 
details, the details really matter in terms of what those rules 
are for guest worker programs because you want to have a 
certain kind of behavior, well that behavior in terms of the 
market will be shaped by these rules.
    There are really two overarching principles for any guest 
worker program, whether it's here in the U.S. or in the United 
Arab Emirates (UAE), whether it's for high-skilled programs 
like the H-1B or lower skilled for like the H-2B. Guest worker 
programs are supposed to fill labor market gaps where there's a 
real genuine labor shortage of U.S. workers, and really 
importantly, guest workers themselves must be protected because 
they're very vulnerable to exploitation.
    What the research shows, and not just research, but we can 
just look at the data. The U.S. government has really failed on 
both accounts meeting both of the principles, and I'll just 
highlight the H-1B as the textbook example of this failure. The 
H-1B program was created, and is intended to fill labor 
shortages for college educated labor markets for jobs. Instead 
of filling those labor market gaps and labor shortages, it's 
instead widely used to hire cheaper indentured workers who are 
exploited to directly compete with American workers, and so 
they're substituting for those American workers.
    And to also subsidize the offshoring of U.S. jobs. Simply 
put, the H-1B visa is the outsourcing visa. I didn't call it 
the outsourcing visa, one of the Indian Commerce Ministers 
called the H-1B the outsourcing visa. It's widely exploited to 
offshore jobs, suppress wages and working conditions, and it 
also fuels rampant wage theft from H-1B workers themselves.
    We just need to look at the government data on who--which 
firms are actually the largest H-1B employers. If you look at 
the top three, they are all IT staffing firms. One based in the 
U.S., Cognizant, and two based in India, InfoSystems, and Tata 
Consultancy. They received an astonishing 350,000 approvals 
over 10 years, and for new workers they received 87,000 new 
initial H-1B visas from the government.
    That 87,000 is enough to populate a mid-sized city. These 
three firms alone took 10 percent or 1 in 10 of all of the cap 
visas for new workers over the past 10 years, crowding out 
employers like Mr. Van Beek, who are trying to go through the 
lottery system and trying to get H-1B visas.
    The reason is pretty simple. It's because these IT staffing 
firms core to their business model is being able to exploit the 
H-1B visa for lower wages, and indenturing those workers. And 
it's highly profitable. It's extremely lucrative, and so it's 
mimicked across the sector by all these other firms, HCL, IBM, 
are all doing these same kinds of things. Thank you for your 
time. I look forward to your questions.
    Chairman Whitehouse. Thanks very much. Let me start with 
Dr. Glennon if I may. We often hear the argument that 
encouraging high-skilled immigrant engineers, technical people, 
entrepreneurs to locate in this country will allow them to 
compete with, and displace American jobs, and challenge the 
American economy. What is wrong with that argument?
    Dr. Glennon. Thank you. So there's two parts that are wrong 
with that argument. Both have to do with the demand side, 
right. So first of all, immigrants are job creators, much more 
than they are job takers, so they are much more likely to start 
a company, which then creates jobs for Americans.
    The second piece that's wrong with that argument is that 
they serve as complements to U.S. born workers. And so if you 
look at for example, the innovation data, right, they not only 
are producing more patents, but they're also actually making 
U.S. inventors much more productive, right? They're helping 
U.S. inventors create more patents and more impactful patents, 
and so it's actually these complementarities that are 
generating economic growth and innovation for the U.S. as a 
whole.
    Chairman Whitehouse. Mr. Bier, could you take your quite 
compelling testimony, and apply it to the issue of economic 
competition between the United States and China? During my 
opening statement I put up a graphic that shows that in a high 
immigration scenario versus in a low immigration scenario, U.S. 
GDP changes quite dramatically.
    This is our--the lavender here is our high immigration, $47 
trillion at 2050 GDP, and low immigration it's only $33 
trillion, that's a $14 trillion gap if you would be good enough 
to make reference to that, and apply your testimony to it.
    Mr. Bier. Sure. Absolutely. Absolutely size, absolutely 
matters. You want to have a large economy, a growing economy, a 
growing workforce, a growing consumer base because that's where 
companies are going to want to invest. If we want to throw our 
weight around on the world stage, which of course we do. We 
want to open up markets. We want to have people appealing to 
us, not to Communist China on issues like free speech, then we 
want to be the largest economy in the world.
    And immigration is really the only way that we're going to 
maintain that. I just want to flag one thing for the Committee, 
that Department of Defense under the Trump administration in 
2020 put out a report saying that today's education pipeline is 
not providing the necessary software engineering resources to 
meet the demand of the defense sectors, and the population of 
China is producing eight times the number of STEM graduates 
than the United States is.
    So we are losing out in an enormous way on the high skill 
side of things, and on the low skill side of things when it 
comes to immigration compared to China.
    Chairman Whitehouse. And just as a general question, can 
anyone offer a positive social benefit from Mr. Van Beek having 
to deport himself out of the United States? Is anybody here to 
defend that? For the record, not one hand has gone up from our 
panel. Mr. Van Beek, seven? Is that how old you were when you 
came to this country?
    Mr. Van Beek. That's correct.
    Chairman Whitehouse. What grade did you first go into?
    Mr. Van Beek. I went into third grade I believe, yes.
    Chairman Whitehouse. Yeah. Really good move to be throwing 
third graders who have spent their entire lives in this country 
out. There is a way to fix it. I tried to do this in the 
National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) last year, and that 
is to open a STEM exemption from the visa caps, which I assume 
would get around Mr. Rector's antipathy to low skilled workers, 
as he calls them.
    STEM is pretty high skilled I would think. And 
unfortunately, we were unable to get that done, but I very much 
hope that we will try again, and perhaps on the basis of the 
testimony here, have more success. With that let me turn to my 
distinguished Ranking Member, Senator Grassley of Iowa.
    Senator Grassley. Mr. Rector, I think you touched a little 
bit on my first question, so I'll give you a chance to 
elaborate your research and analysis on the cost of illegal 
immigrants to local, state and federal government has 
consistently shown fiscal burden to the U.S. taxpayer. What 
types of costs can government leaders from New York City, Mayor 
Eric Adams, to small town mayors in Massachusetts expect to 
face?
    Mr.  Rector. About two-thirds of the fiscal costs go to the 
federal government, but the other third goes to state and local 
communities, starting with healthcare. They have to spend a lot 
on that. The average cost of an education in the United States 
for children is $15,000 per child per year, most illegal 
immigrants have kids.
    Someone has to pay the cost of educating those kids, that's 
borne by local governments. It's certainly not being paid for 
by the illegal immigrant themselves that has an eighth grade 
education. And then you have the routine expenditures of police 
and sewers and so forth and so on, that's why even if you 
abolish the welfare system, illegal immigrants would still be 
in fiscal deficit, they would still receive much more in 
expenditures than they pay in taxes.
    Today they get about $3 of government expenditures for 
every dollar of taxes they pay. And I'm talking taxes 
comprehensively. I've got in our calculations, as in the 
National Academy of Sciences, we have excise taxes, cigarette 
taxes, so forth and everything, they do pay taxes, but they 
receive far more in benefits.
    Senator Grassley. Okay. Mr. Chairman, I have three articles 
from the New York Times that I would like to put in the record, 
and these articles deal with costs to governments.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \10\ Documents submitted by Senator Grassley appear in the appendix 
on page 134.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Chairman Whitehouse. Without objection.
    Senator Grassley. Thank you. Dr. Hira, we have heard this 
morning from other witnesses that the solution to the problem 
in our immigration system specifically H-1B is to just increase 
the number of visas given out each year. Is that a reasonable 
solution? And explain why or why not?
    Dr. Hira. Mr. Grassley, thank you for the question. It's a 
bad idea. More is not better. Better is better. The solution to 
the H-1B program is contained in your bill, which is raising 
wages, and selecting workers who are better. Right now the top 
firms, like Cognizant, InfoSystems, and Tata, are not bringing 
in H-1B workers because they bring any special skills.
    In fact, they have lower skills. They've all been involved 
in scandals where U.S. workers directly trained their 
replacements at these companies, and we're talking about 
hundreds if not thousands of workers. So we should be shooting 
for better, not more.
    Senator Grassley. Dr. Hira, you helped work with Durbin and 
me on our H-1B bill. Given your study of the program, this visa 
program over the years, can you tell us the top two changes 
that you would make to the program that would have the most 
immediate and impactful improvements in the program? And are 
those changes in S. 979?
    Dr. Hira. Thank you, Mr. Grassley. Yes. They are contained 
in the bill, and the top two I would say are wages. Why are we 
setting wages so low, you're inducing and incentivizing firms 
to bring in lower paid H-1B workers. The second top one, and I 
think the bill has a tremendous number of good features. The 
second one I would point to is that it ensures that U.S. 
workers have a legitimate shot at the jobs, and the job 
openings.
    Right now, contrary to conventional wisdom and 
misunderstanding, people think that you have to demonstrate 
that no U.S. worker is available. Fact, before hiring an H-1B, 
in fact employer can't bypass the U.S. labor market all 
together, bring in H-1Bs, import H-1B workers, and even 
displace U.S. workers with H-1B workers. So it would solve at 
least those two problems.
    The other thing I'd add is that some of these things can be 
done administratively by the Departments of Labor and Homeland 
Security, but the statutory fixes would be permanent ones.
    Senator Grassley. Yeah. Mr. Rector, my last question. 
Comparing your recently updated fiscal burden data to your 
previous research, did you find particular changes in the data 
that surprised you, or were notable?
    Mr. Rector. The absolute magnitude of the growth of the 
illegal immigrants. This is close to 2 million people a year 
coming in, being admitted, and being released into the United 
States with no pretext of removing them ever, or deporting 
them. We've never had anything like that. And this will 
accelerate because in fact it's going so fast that the Census 
Bureau can't even keep up with these changes. It's absolutely 
unprecedented in the history of this country.
    Senator Padilla. Thank you Senator Grassley, excuse me. Let 
me thank the witnesses once again for your testimony, and 
particularly Mr. Van Beek for sharing your story with us today. 
My heart goes out to you, and it's an outrage that you were 
forced to leave your home and family behind for another country 
that you barely knew, as you explained, after living here for 
so many years.
    That's a significant failure of our immigration system to 
not consider the fate of the children of temporary visa holders 
whose parents have applied for a green card, but again, this is 
a lawful mechanism, but they're stuck waiting in year's long 
backlogs, and children like you, and there's many, many 
throughout the country, at risk of aging out from protection of 
their parent's status.
    So I too, similar to what Senator Whitehouse mentioned, had 
a fix. We have an idea. We have a solution here. It's called 
the America's Children Act, which I hope we're able to pass in 
time to help other people in circumstances very similar to 
yours. So we will continue to press this legislation, to 
address the needs of thousands of others, what we called 
documented DREAMers in this situation.
    Can you describe, Mr. Van Beek, your experience regarding 
the challenges and uncertainty that your family encountered due 
to your immigration status, especially up to your self-
deportation?
    Mr. Van Beek. Yes, certainly. Thank you. So the uncertainty 
was kind of up to the last minute almost. With my employer kind 
of the last hope being the H-1B visa lottery of 2022. We didn't 
really know until about April, March-April that I was not 
selected. And with my OPT expiring in July there was no other 
status that I could, you know, transition into, so it was 
basically then a rush to figure out how I'm going to move back 
to the country, and where I was going to live.
    So you know, I did apartment searching online, a wonderful 
thing the internet sometimes. That made it a little bit easier, 
but still, you know, I didn't know what I was going into, and.
    Senator Padilla. I imagine it was stressful for your 
family?
    Mr. Van Beek. For sure.
    Senator Padilla. And I could imagine for your employer. 
It's very hard to replace a worker like you.
    Mr. Van Beek. It is. Yeah. We just previously to that 
during the COVID pandemic had to, you know, hire a number of 
workers to as our company is growing significantly, so.
    Senator Padilla. So again, I just wanted to underscore the 
very real people impact on this in terms of your family, but 
the economic impact in terms of an employer. Next question, we 
heard in your testimony today that immigrants boost innovation, 
even increase productivity of U.S. born workers where they are 
present.
    And we know that numerous immigrant founded startups have 
grown to become some of America's most successful companies. As 
of 2023, nearly 45 percent of Fortune 500 companies, including 
Costco, Apple, and Moderna, were founded by immigrants, or 
their children. Those are facts. But despite the widespread 
evidence that immigrants are significant contributors to the 
U.S. economy, our current immigration laws do not provide a 
viable visa option for them to start their new venture, leaving 
many potential founders to move to competing countries, with 
less outdated and restrictive immigration laws, again causing 
America to fall behind.
    Dr. Glennon, you touched on this in your testimony. Can you 
just expand a little bit more? What is the economic impact of 
these businesses and jobs moving elsewhere, and what does that 
mean for the American people?
    Dr. Glennon. Yeah. Thank you. So as I mentioned in my 
testimony, you know, immigrants are 80 percent more likely to 
form startups, and that's actually despite the fact that we 
don't have any pathway for them to form startups currently. I 
mean so under something like the H-1B program, there's no 
ability to form a startup under any of the other programs, 
short of permanent residency.
    There's no way to form a startup. And so what I found in my 
research is that many of these constrained immigrant would-be 
founders who moved to the U.S., wanted to form a startup in the 
U.S. had to leave and go somewhere else. In my paper that was 
Canada.
    Senator Padilla. Yes.
    Dr. Glennon. And that meant that those jobs that they're 
creating go to Canadians. The innovation that they are creating 
then goes to the Canadian economy, the consumption that is 
occurring goes to Canada as well.
    Senator Padilla. I take that as maybe a recommendation you 
have to create a startup visa. In addition to that, can you 
comment on the impact of expanding employment-based visa 
numbers, or lifting the country caps that are in place, and 
from an economic standpoint what that would mean?
    Dr. Glennon. Yeah. So you know, a big part of the problem 
right now is the uncertainty, right, which we heard about from 
Mr. Van Beek. So if you are an immigrant, and you want to 
consume, or you want to form a startup, or you want to invest. 
If you don't know if you can actually stay, then you're really 
limited in how much you can do that.
    And so it's really depressing how much immigrants are 
actually able to contribute to our economy, and the same goes 
for businesses, right? If they're not sure that they care hire 
the immigrants that they need, then they're going to be also 
more wary about investing.
    Senator Padilla. Thank you. Senator Braun.

                   STATEMENT OF SENATOR BRAUN

    Senator Braun. Thank you acting Mr. Chair. It's such an 
interesting conversation because in my home state of Indiana, 
crossroads of America, the biggest manufacturing state per 
capita, really in every nook and cranny has a strong immigrant 
presence.
    But I think what we've got to get to the bottom of, since 
everyone wants something to work better, is how do we get 
there? And the sad think about this place, you've got to get 60 
Senators to agree to it, even on issues that have so much 
merit. I, back in March of 21, went with 16-17 other 
republicans down to the border, and we see that up close. You 
see the humanitarian issues involved in there.
    I traveled, visited all 92 counties, heard the same thing. 
Workforce, workforce, workforce, and we know how immigrants 
become the entrepreneurs, the startup businesses and all that. 
So how do we get to where we kind of can solve the issue, and 
listening to the border patrol, I think it all starts down 
there on the southern border.
    The whole issue of comprehensive immigration reform, so you 
don't have people coming in risking life and limb, when there's 
a need for much more legal immigration, how do you get there? 
Well they were very clear. They said in the highest traffic 
areas you had to have something physically in place to help 
them out, that was going to reduce the flow.
    And then you do need to throw everything at it, in terms of 
technology, and additional labor resources so that we get back 
to a secure border. Then I think you cascade quickly into 
solutions. When one side of the aisle has chosen to get rid of 
the idea of having a secure border, I don't think that syncs up 
with the majority of Americans, and especially the legal 
immigrants that have come into this country.
    All the stories I just briefly heard I hear repeats of it. 
We do so many issues involving immigration in our own 
constituent service back in Indiana. But how do you get to 
where we start solving the problem? I think you're going to 
have to have security there, based upon the experts who tell us 
what needs to be done, and then you start looking at how you 
solve all the related problems.
    And I think most republicans would agree with what I've 
just said, but until you abandon the current policies that seem 
to promote a completely open border, it puts in peril the ones 
that want to come into this country, and it causes chaos once 
you're here. So I could dwell and go on, but I think there's 
going to be general agreement with that on our side of the 
aisle, and I hope on the other side of the aisle.
    Because immigrants built this country. How could we be in 
such a complex, confusing situation that we have now in front 
of us? Secure the border, put the resources there. Look what 
was working pre-Biden Administration. A lot of the aspirations 
that the Biden Administration wants they're aspirational 
because it's not based upon a secure border.
    I'm going to look at a practical matter. The country is 
borrowing 30 cents on every dollar we spend currently. That's 
going to be a huge burden for the next generation, and their 
kids, and when you bring folks into the country that aren't 
prepared even to blend into the workforce, it puts a further 
stress on what's been the biggest dereliction in this country 
that politically we're willing to borrow from our kids and 
grandkids, for our latest and greatest political idea, none of 
them which have been knocking it out of the park.
    Mr. Rector, I'd like to ask you would you be able to 
quantify in some way Social Security and Medicare, the two 
systems that structurally are breaking the budget, and we need 
to roll our sleeves up and try to fix. What does--what happens 
financially? How much would it cost? Can you put a number on it 
if you try to integrate that into a system that's currently 
going broke?
    Mr. Rector. Not only transfers from the resources from the 
young to the old, but it also transfers resources from affluent 
to the non-affluent, so when you bring in for example, someone 
with an eighth grade education, although we will always hear 
oh, they put some money into social security, they get vastly 
more back out of it than they put in.
    It's obvious. And plus you can't just look at Social 
Security in isolation because these individuals are also taking 
all these other resources so that they effectively are usually 
receiving, going to receive over their lifetimes, about $3 of 
government expenditures for every dollar of taxes they put in. 
And again, I'm very comprehensive in the way I count the taxes 
they pay.
    You don't pay much income tax, but they do pay a lot of 
sales tax, things like that at the local level. But it's only 
here in Washington that you would actually think that someone 
that has an eighth grade education is going to put more into 
government in taxes than they take back out and benefits. It 
doesn't matter whether that person is born in Tennessee or born 
in Guatemala.
    If you bring in people with a very low education levels, 
they will access the welfare benefits system. That's clearly 
what the National Academy of Sciences shows, and then they 
impose massive long-term tax burdens on the taxpayer. Illegals 
currently, I would say, are going to cost the country just 
trillions and trillions of dollars in net.
    You have to bring in higher skilled people, individuals who 
have a college education, do pay more in taxes than they 
receive in benefits. Those who do not, do exactly the opposite.
    Senator Braun. And I think that just shows how difficult 
the problem is because we hear it from all, from the entire 
spectrum in terms of what we need to do, but if it's not based 
upon a secure border that we were starting to put in place, we 
even exacerbate the problem for those that want to come into 
the country, and for how they're going to make a life here once 
they get here.
    And look at what was working, secure the border, roll up 
our sleeves, fix the problem. Thank you Mr. Chairman.
    Senator Padilla. Senator Braun, before turning to Senator 
Lujan, I appreciate Mr. Rector's knowledge of the perspectives 
on the answer to your question and other methodologies. Let me 
ask Mr. Bier if he might chime in here on the question. Social 
Security was a specific example, and the impact of immigrants 
on the economy.
    Mr. Bier. Oh look, the fundamental problem with Social 
Security is there are not enough workers paying into the system 
to support the retirees, and that problem is going to get 
worse. More workers would benefit, that's what the Social 
Security trustees say. The Congressional Budget Office agrees 
with that perspective.
    I fundamentally do agree that there needs to be other 
reforms to the system to make it financially sound, but we have 
the analysis to show that more workers is going to increase the 
number of taxes going in, and improve the fiscal situation. On 
the whole, if you look at all of the taxes, all the benefits, 
you know, we've done it.
    We have this huge, huge report right here that you can 
read, that looks into this, and the biggest set of taxes that 
Mr. Rector is not including in his analysis is the taxes that 
business pay on capital when the hire workers. So every time 
you hire workers you almost always are investing more capital 
in the business, and that is the biggest affect, trillions of 
dollars increase in capital as a result of immigration.
    Senator Braun. And do you believe a secure border has to be 
something that you have to have in place to then go after what 
you're looking at?
    Mr. Bier. Well I think legal immigration is critical to 
having a secure border. When I talk to Border Patrol officials 
they say look, we don't want these people who are coming for 
peaceful purposes to be crossing here. We should have a legal 
process for them to come.
    Senator Padilla. Thank you. Senator Lujan?

                   STATEMENT OF SENATOR LUJAN

    Senator Lujan. Thank you Mr. Chairman, and thanks to 
everyone for being with us today. Thank you for the panel for 
making time to be here. I believe immigration is a fundamental 
part of our country. Immigrants not only enhance the culture of 
our communities, but they come to the U.S. looking to work hard 
to make things better, to create opportunities.
    For those that have started businesses here, and you know, 
the line of questioning that I just heard, and one of the 
responses, we have a workforce shortage in America, especially 
in the agricultural communities, and in places that are 
packaging produce, and poultry, and pork and beef. I want to 
see more people come to the United States that have the 
opportunity to go through apprenticeship programs, or go to 
college, but there's a lot of people that do very well that 
work in all these other spaces.
    When I traveled to every country in the union, and I speak 
to people where there's a shortage, they tell me about the 
needs they have. It takes people from all backgrounds. Now my 
father was a welder. He was an iron worker. He did not have a 
college degree.
    He became the Speaker of the House in the State of New 
Mexico, the longest serving speaker in our state. When he was 
Speaker, he was the only blue collar serving speaker in the 
country. He had a lot to offer America, and a lot to offer New 
Mexico. I hope we just step back, and we understand the needs 
that exist in our country, and find a way to get there.
    I appreciate the question that was asked by my colleague, 
Mr. Braun, about border security. One of the stats that I am 
astonished with is that less than 10 percent of vehicles that 
come into the United States on the southern border are 
screened. It takes money to make investments and bring 
technology so that we get 100 percent vehicles screened.
    And not just coming into the United States, but leaving the 
United States, so that we can get our hands on all the bad 
stuff coming in and all the guns going out. But it takes 
investment. It takes money, and we have to get there in that 
place. So as we have this comprehensive conversation about 
border security, I certainly hope that there's a willingness to 
make investments so that we're able to see everything coming in 
and going out.
    And it's not just the southern border. The rates of bad 
things coming into the United States from Canada is horrific. 
The stuff that comes in from the water ports is just as bad in 
these big shipping containers that travel around the world. Why 
aren't we screening those? And why are we helping allied 
countries around the world, who also send goods to the United 
States, to screen them, their incoming and their outgoing?
    I'm just beside myself with some of this, but to the point 
today, Dr. Glennon, is it true that the Center for American 
Progress analyzed that providing a pathway to citizenship for 
undocumented immigrants to U.S. would bolster the United States 
GDP over the years, and create over 400,000 new jobs?
    Dr. Glennon. That's my understanding. There's an important 
complementarity between low wage workers and higher wage 
workers in particular. So for example, we have a shortage of 
childcare providers, right, and there's work showing that when 
you allow more undocumented immigrants, or more lower skilled 
immigrants then it actually allows women to enter the workforce 
because they no longer are restrained in their ability to do 
so.
    Senator Lujan. I appreciate that Dr. Glennon, and I had 
some constituents come visit with me today from southern New 
Mexico, who were sharing with me the problem with trying to 
find healthcare staff right now, or sorry, childcare staff. 
They built new facilities, but it's hard for them to get them 
staffed up, so I appreciate what you focused in on there.
    I'm reminded, Mr. Chairman, as my time expires, that--
(audio dropped). That it had a positive score for what it would 
do to strengthen the GDP in America, with all the challenges 
that we have, maybe we start by dusting that one off, and get 
that one passed. And let's move from there and see if we can 
find a path forward.
    But I certainly appreciate this important hearing, the 
testimony that's been provided. The testimony that will still 
be submitted. I have a lot of questions, I'll make sure that I 
get them in, so I can be respectful of my colleagues, but thank 
you, Mr. Chairman, for holding this important hearing, and for 
everyone coming in today.
    Senator Whitehouse. Thank you Senator, and now we will turn 
to Senator Graham, who I said at the outset when he was not 
here, is such an important figure in the bipartisan 
conversations that we've had on immigration over many years. 
Senator Graham.

                  STATEMENT OF SENATOR GRAHAM

    Senator Graham. Well thank you, Mr. Chairman. This is a 
really good topic. Let's see if we can find some common ground. 
To the panel, how many of you believe that the southern border 
is secure? How many of you believe it's not secure? 4 out of 5. 
What about you Mr. Hira?
    Dr. Hira. I don't know enough about how that would be 
defined to pass judgement.
    Senator Graham. Well we've had over 5 million people come 
in illegally, so anyway. I think it's unsecure, and we need to 
make it secure. Now let's talk about immigration. What 
percentage of agricultural workers, the people that go harvest 
the crops, and do all the agriculture stuff are undocumented, 
illegal immigrants? Does anybody know?
    Mr. Bier. 50 percent.
    Senator Graham. Okay. Does anybody doubt what he said? All 
right. If those 50 percent went away tomorrow what would 
happen?
    Mr. Bier. A lot of farms would go bankrupt. There would be 
a massive shift in trade practices, so we'd start importing a 
lot more food from abroad.
    Senator Graham. Does anybody disagree with that?
    Mr. Rector. Yeah. Farm labor is unique in its reliance on 
immigration, but if you look at all the other sectors of the 
economy, types of occupations.
    Senator Graham. Well let's just stick with farm labor right 
now.
    Mr. Rector. Okay.
    Senator Graham. Do you agree that I think it's closer to 70 
percent. Do you agree that a substantial percentage of people 
in the agricultural business, workers in the field are 
undocumented illegal immigrants?
    Mr. Rector. They're certainly immigrants, and probably a 
lot of them are illegal.
    Senator Graham. Yes. So I guess here's my point. That's 
just one industry. There are a bunch of others, meat packing. 
Have you ever been into a meat packing plant? Has anybody ever 
been to a meat packing plant? You ought to go. I don't think 
you will stay. Most people working in a meat packing plant are 
immigrants.
    My point is let's make this a win/win. Stop illegal 
immigration. Let's go to merit-based immigration. Do you agree 
with that Mr. Rector?
    Mr. Rector. I think that the problem is the issue here that 
I would say is we used to have this rhetoric that there are 
jobs that Americans won't do, and you've isolated two of them.
    Senator Graham. Do you believe there are jobs Americans 
won't do, or is that just rhetoric?
    Mr. Rector. I think the two that you isolated are, that's 
probably about right. But all the other jobs that Americans 
allegedly won't do, more than half the workers are actually 
U.S. born citizens, and the wages in those industries have 
remained basically flat for decades.
    Senator Graham. Because people are paying illegal 
immigrants under the table.
    Mr. Rector. Partly, and it's also we always talk about 
these labor shortages, but if you look at the below median 
income in the United States, it really hasn't gone up in 
constant dollars for decades. That is not an indication of a 
chronic labor shortage.
    Senator Graham. Well if you have a business, you're having 
a hard time getting workers. Restaurants, every restaurant in 
South Carolina's number one issue I can't find people to work. 
Part of it is we pay people too much not to work, and the other 
part is people sort of moved on in the economy. Mr. Hira, 
you're the H-1B advocate here.
    Dr. Hira. I'm not sure I would call myself an advocate.
    Senator Graham. Do you want more H-1B visas?
    Dr. Hira. No.
    Senator Graham. Do you want less?
    Dr. Hira. I've argued for a better system. Right now, just 
to give you an example, we had 750,000 applications submitted 
for 85,000 spots this year. And instead of picking the best of 
that 750,000, picking the 85,000 top ones, they chose to pick 
them randomly, by random.
    Senator Graham. I am with you.
    Dr. Hira. That doesn't make any sense. It's irrational.
    Senator Graham. Okay. Do you think we should have more 
visas available in this space?
    Dr. Hira. No. Not under the current system. It has to be 
reformed.
    Senator Graham. Well let's say you reform the system.
    Dr. Hira. Well it's a hypothetical. It depends on what 
reforms.
    Senator Graham. Could we do it better?
    Dr. Hira. Yes.
    Senator Graham. My question is are we generating enough 
workers in our own country to fill these jobs?
    Dr. Hira. Absolutely.
    Senator Graham. Okay. Well why do we need the visa program?
    Dr. Hira. We don't need one as it's currently constructed.
    Senator Graham. Well are you arguing that we don't need an 
H-1 visa program at all?
    Dr. Hira. I think we should favor integration over guest 
worker programs. I think we've ended up relying on----
    Senator Graham. You know, I don't mean--wait, I'm asking 
you fairly simple question. In this space employers tell me 
that without immigration they'd have a hard time filling the 
workforce because people are not graduating in our colleges 
with a skillset at the levels necessary. Is that a false 
statement they're giving me?
    Dr. Hira. I think it's a misleading one, yeah.
    Senator Graham. Okay.
    Dr. Hira. If you want to look at whether there's a shortage 
in STEM, and you could look at even in software development, 
what would you look at? We have a market. You look at the 
price, the wages, and wages have been flat. They haven't gone 
up, so there isn't any shortage.
    Senator Graham. Mr. Bier, do you agree with that?
    Mr. Bier. No. I don't agree with it at all. Unemployment in 
software development is below 2 percent. We've seen massive 
increases in the number of U.S. born workers, 150 percent 
increase since 2006 in a U.S. born software developer worker 
population in the United States. So there hasn't been any 
displacement. There's unemployment, the numbers are going up, 
there's just not enough workers all around.
    Senator Graham. I'll end on this, and thank you for 
indulging me. I've been following this for decades. We don't 
have a rational legal immigration system. Our population is 
declining, it is not growing. If you know anything about the 
American economy, the number one problem most employers have is 
finding reliable workers.
    If you deported all illegal immigrants in the agricultural 
space, we'd all starve. That doesn't justify illegal 
immigration, it means we need to reform the system to make it a 
win/win. When it comes to the H-1B world, I am convinced our 
education system is not producing enough in this area, and you 
need immigration to fill in the gap, but it needs to be what 
Dr. Hira says, rational and merit-based.
    So you'll never convince me that our immigration system is 
working because it's not, and the problem is that we need to 
bring people into our country, Mr. Chairman, from all over this 
world based on merit, and if we don't get a hold of this, the 
population decline, the number of people affected by drugs, and 
inability to work is going up.
    We have a recruiting problem in the military because most 
people of a military service age are not able to serve. So to 
deny that immigration is not going to be the life blood of the 
future economy is a mistake. To say the current system works is 
an equal mistake. Thank you for having this hearing.
    Chairman Whitehouse. Thank you very much Senator Graham. 
Senator Scott is our final witness of this hearing, unless 
someone else arrives at the hearing, just general notice to 
anybody who plans to attend that it will wrap with Senator 
Scott, and you have his five minutes to get here. Senator 
Scott, please proceed.

                   STATEMENT OF SENATOR SCOTT

    Senator Scott. Thank you Chairman. Thanks for holding the 
hearing. Mr. Rector, how in the last two years, how many 
people--first of all I come from an immigration state. I come 
from Florida, so we have a lot of primarily Latin America, but 
some Eastern Europe, but a lot from Latin America. So, and our 
economy is over the last, you know, especially 50 years, a lot 
of it has been developed based on legal immigration from Cuba, 
Venezuela, and of course American citizens have come from 
places like Puerto Rico.
    So in the last two years how many people have come into our 
country legally, and how many people have come in illegally?
    Mr. Rector. Equal. I know illegally it's been 5 million 
people. We know that by looking at the encounters that result 
in admission to the country. It's absolutely unprecedented. And 
this discussion is a little distorted because we talk about 
needing STEM engineers and things. They're not STEM engineers, 
or Ph.D.s with electronics engineering coming across the border 
here.
    All of that immigration historically is very, very low 
educated, and it is not going to produce technological change 
or anything. Many of these people have an eighth grade 
education. And what they actually do in my perspective is to 
push out the lowest skilled American workers, particularly 
minority workers, right out of the workforce. And there's a 
massive literature that indicates that.
    Senator Scott. So you think in the last two years about 5 
million legal and 5 million illegal?
    Mr. Rector. I believe so. I know the illegals.
    Senator Scott. Does anybody know the legal number of people 
who have come here legally in the last two years?
    Mr. Bier. In the last two years?
    Senator Scott. Yeah.
    Mr. Bier. We've awarded about 2.1 million green cards for 
two years, so about----
    Senator Scott. For two years?
    Mr. Bier. Okay. So 2.1 have come here legal, and 5 million 
illegally.
    Senator Scott. So if you come here legally, what benefits 
does the government give you versus if you come here illegally? 
Does anybody know? Mr. Rector?
    Mr. Rector. Yeah. The legal immigrants after five years are 
eligible for the welfare system. 90 different means tested 
programs. They also are eligible for Social Security and 
Medicare, but that's a little illusory because the welfare 
programs primarily have eligibility through children, and 
illegal immigrants have children they get in the welfare state.
    And basically, we're promising amnesty, which most of the 
members of Congress, or at least on the left side, want 
amnesty. That would give the illegals eligibility to absolutely 
everything.
    Senator Scott. Let's go back. So if you come here legally.
    Mr. Rector. Yeah.
    Senator Scott. Is there a cost to other taxpayers?
    Mr. Rector. Absolutely. Again, the simplest thing to 
understand----
    Senator Scott. Just on the legal. What would be the average 
cost to an American citizens if somebody comes here legally?
    Mr. Rector. It's a couple, $10,000 a year, depending upon 
the education level. Again, the simplest thing to understand is 
if you bring in someone with a college education, they're going 
to pay more in taxes than they take out in benefits. If you 
bring in somebody with a tenth grade education, it's exactly 
the opposite.
    Over the course of a lifetime they're going to take out 
about $3.00 of benefits for every dollar of taxes they pay.
    Senator Scott. So if you come here legally, right now. If 
you come here legally, the 2.1 million people who came here 
legally, let's just take them, they come here. They come here 
legally. They get their green card. Do they cost us money?
    Mr. Rector. Yes.
    Senator Scott. Are they productive citizens day one?
    Mr. Rector. The welfare system is designed to support 
people who work, okay? So they in fact do work, but they also 
receive enormous amounts of benefits. That's the nature of the 
welfare state.
    Senator Scott. Do the people that come here illegally get 
more than benefits?
    Mr. Rector. No. They get slightly less, so they're actually 
slightly less expensive to the taxpayer, but the bottom line is 
a person with a tenth grade education, eleventh grade 
education, we redistribute income to that person very strongly 
whether they're born in Kentucky, or whether they are here from 
abroad.
    Senator Scott. Well let me ask you a question. So what you 
see in the news is places like New York. They're saying that 
all these illegal immigrants have come up there, and now 
there's housing in hotels, and they're giving food vouchers and 
things like that. So a legal citizen--if somebody comes here 
with a green card doesn't get that.
    Mr. Rector. Absolutely not. New York City is a little 
extreme because they have a right to shelter there. But the 
bottom line is again, I've studied the welfare system in what I 
call the broader transfer system for my entire career. If you 
have people that are less skilled, we support them. We don't 
require them to pay much in taxes. We give them lots of 
benefits from welfare, Social Security, education of the kids, 
all of which is free.
    All of which has to be paid for by the U.S. taxpayer. And 
when you bring in that type of individual from either illegal, 
or legal immigration, it puts enormous fiscal pressures on the 
rest of the taxpayers.
    Senator Scott. Okay. So okay, so nobody knows the number. 
If you came here legally what it costs us versus if somebody 
came here illegally, and nobody knows that number. There's 
never been a study?
    Mr. Rector. Yes. I can give you that number. I've done that 
study.
    Senator Scott. Okay.
    Mr. Rector. And it's about 50 percent higher if you're 
legally holding education constant, okay, because the illegals 
do not get mean assisted welfare to the same degree.
    Senator Scott. Have you ever seen anything on this? Has 
anybody ever done a study on like take the 2.1 million people.
    Senator Whitehouse. I think the witnesses are better 
positioned to answer the question.
    Mr. Rector. Yes. Senator I have done it.
    Senator Scott. You have. Okay. I'd like to see it.
    Mr. Rector. Absolutely.
    Senator Scott. Here's the way I look at it. It's not fair 
to the person that comes here legally, right? It's completely 
unfair to someone who comes through the legal process, because 
first of all it's not free. It costs them money. My office does 
a lot of this in Florida as you would expect.
    And we help a lot of people go through the process that 
have a right to be here. They have a right to be here, but they 
don't know how the process works. And then the lawyers, it's 
shocking how much these people are paying, so that's one thing.
    But I'd like to see a study of that, but first off, I think 
it's completely unfair if somebody comes through the process, 
then somebody comes here illegally. Second, it would be nice to 
know what the cost of the shelter and all this stuff is because 
that does cost us, and all of us are going to pay this in 
taxes.
    And then the other question I have is it has to impact, and 
I don't know where the number--where you limit it, but it has 
to impact jobs. I mean if there's way more people in the job 
market.
    Mr. Rector. There is a very extensive literature on the 
impact of low skill immigration on low skill American workers, 
particularly male, low skill, black male workers, okay. And I 
know of 80--I think it's 83 studies of that that I have read.
    Senator Scott. Do the rest of you agree with that? Do you 
guys agree with that? You don't think that----
    Mr. Rector. But the bottom line is 9 out of 10 of those 
studies show that there's a significant wage loss effect when 
you bring in low skilled immigrant workers to compete with 
those low skill American workers. It's just the literature is 
overwhelming, it's just overwhelming, and it's common sense. 
It's what economics tells us.
    Chairman Whitehouse. We are beyond the Senator's time, but 
I did see Mr. Bier reaching for his microphone, and he was 
spoken over by Mr. Rector. So let me give him a chance to add 
his response to the general question asked by Senator Scott.
    Mr. Bier. If you look at when we saw the greatest wage 
growth in the United States for the non-college educated 
population, it was from the 1950s through the 1970s. When the 
labor force growth for that population was three times what it 
is now. And since the 1980s. So the idea that we're seeing more 
labor force growth, more labor force competition for this 
population, is totally untrue.
    In fact, that population is in decline. And we need workers 
to fill these types of jobs. We talked about manufacturing, 
talked about meat processing, talked about farm workers, there 
are jobs. And in fact, there are far more job openings than 
there are unemployed people in the United States right now.
    If you want a job I can find you a job, no problem.
    Senator Scott. Well logically you would say that if there's 
more workers it's going to impact my ability to get the job. A 
kid growing up in a poor family in a poor neighborhood. That's 
what you would say, right? I think that's logical now. There 
might be other factors that are going to grow your economy 
faster, but I think the other thing we're dealing with is the 
fact that we have now a labor participation rate, and we've got 
100 million people in our country that are of working age, that 
are now not working.
    And all these things, it's not like just one thing we're 
going to fix. We've got to fix immigration, and we've got to 
fix, we've got to get people back to work because it's not 
going to work if we don't.
    Chairman Whitehouse. Again, I saw Mr. Bier trying to 
respond. If you don't mind letting him talk.
    Mr. Bier. But just the logical point, yes. When more people 
come in they increase the supply of labor, but they also 
increase the demand for labor. So if I can hire a worker on my 
farm, I'm buying equipment that worker is going to use, and 
that's increasing demand for workers in manufacturing.
    I could give you countless examples. The H-2B visa lottery 
when the losers who don't get the visas, don't create more jobs 
for Americans, the ones who win the lottery create more jobs 
for Americans.
    Senator Scott. So I'm pro-immigration.
    Chairman Whitehouse. Okay.
    Mr. Bier. I know.
    Senator Scott. I just think we've got to figure out. I 
think we have to do two things. We have to get Americans back 
to work, and two, we have to figure out how we incentivize, 
create a system where we get people that want to come here to 
work, and not be dependent. Because I mean I think we have to 
do both of those things, and there has to be limits. I mean you 
just can't say 100 million people.
    If all of Guatemala comes tomorrow, they might be wonderful 
people, but we couldn't afford that.
    Mr. Rector. If I could give it another historical example.
    Chairman Whitehouse. Thank you. Let me wrap up at this 
point. We're five and a half minutes over the Senator's time. I 
think if there's one thing that this hearing demonstrates there 
is plenty to disagree over on the broad issue of immigration 
and border security. But it does seem that as Senator Graham 
said, there is also common ground within that broad range.
    We easily achieved common ground on the notion that Mr. Van 
Beek's situation contributes zero value to our country, and 
should be fixed. And I did not hear any rebuttal of the numbers 
we've been operating under, which is that a low immigration 
future runs us to a 33 trillion dollar economy by 2050.
    A high immigration economy runs us to a $47 trillion 
economy by 2050, and our current trajectory is $37 trillion. So 
we're not trending towards the stronger economy, we're trending 
towards the weaker, low immigration economy. And put against 
that is the estimation that--well China's economy always may 
blow up a bit, but the current trend they're headed toward a 
$50 trillion economy.
    So if you take the competition with China seriously, we're 
not--we're just a close second to them if we do our best work 
on this. So what I hope is that we can work off that, what I 
hope is a rock solid base of common ground that expanding 
lawful immigration, which I would argue means including law 
abiding undocumented workers, will yield enormous, enormous 
economic rewards for our country, which will benefit as I said, 
rising tide lifts all boats.
    If the Ranking Member, or Senator Lee appear they'll be 
offered the chance to offer a closing remark as well. Them not 
being here, I'll offer Senator Padilla a chance for a closing 
remark. If anybody, my co-chair, much appreciation for his work 
on this. If there are pending questions--if anybody has 
questions they'd like to ask the witnesses by way of questions 
for the record, we'll want them in by noon tomorrow.
    And if the witnesses would indulge us by responding 
promptly to those, so we can get responses back, I would be 
grateful, or staff will be pursuing that with you to make sure 
that that is done. I'm grateful to you all, and I will let 
Senator Padilla close us out. Thank you.
    Senator Padilla. I just want to take a moment to once 
again, thank Chairman Whitehouse, Ranking Member Grassley and 
all the staff who made today's hearing possible, and to thank 
the witnesses once again for being here today. Today's hearing 
was critically important, not just to help members further 
understand the deep, economic benefits of immigration in the 
United States of America.
    But for Americans at home to understand the fundamental 
difference between the headlines they see each and every day, 
and the reality of what immigrants mean to our nation. Dozens 
and dozens of empirical studies have found that immigration 
benefits our economy. Immigration benefits not just immigrant 
workers, immigration benefits American workers.
    It would be smart to listen to the economists, and business 
leaders, who are sounding the alarm on our labor shortage, and 
it's astonishing to hear some of my Republican colleagues say 
that their primary objective is to get Americans back to work. 
We have historic record low unemployment, and we still have 
significant workforce shortages in a number of sectors.
    In addition to that, we have a decline in our population 
growth rate. As I mentioned before, meaningful immigration 
reform could lead to 3.2 million new jobs in America over the 
next decade and 1 trillion dollars added to our economy. Who 
wouldn't want that?
    From healthcare, to business, STEM, to agriculture, 
immigrants have been, and remain key to our national security 
and economic prosperity. That's right. Economic prosperity and 
national security. By refusing to act on immigration reform, 
solutions we know we need. By refusing to have constructive 
conversations about the border while also trying to improve 
legal pathways to immigration, Republicans are holding our 
economy back, and threatening our global standing.
    Their unwillingness to work with us means our competitors 
will continue to gain an advantage on us. And it means that 
we're losing out on the talent that could be coming to America 
to create jobs due to next world changing startup, to discover 
the next lifesaving medication, or even just to become the next 
great Little League coach, or neighbor who contributes to the 
community.
    There are many steps we could take right now to start to 
chip away at this outdated system. Solutions like passing the 
America's Children Act to keep the children of long-term visa 
holders, like Laurens, at home here in America where they 
belong. By expanding the supply of green cards, and eliminating 
per country visa caps to help reduce wait times and backlogs, 
and reuniting families, and fostering more innovation and 
growth in America at the same time.
    We could make sure that international, and undocumented 
students can access and complete higher education in the United 
States, and enter our workforce, not pushing them out to take 
their talents and skills and education elsewhere. We can, and 
should update the existing registry cut-off date for the first 
time in almost 40 years, so that millions of immigrants who are 
already living here, already working here, already contributing 
to the success of the United States, can live freely without 
fear of an uncertain future.
    And we can make progress by passing my bill, the 
Citizenship for Essential Workers Act, to create a pathway to 
citizenship. Not automatic, but a pathway to citizenship for 
the workers that the United States government deemed essential 
during the COVID-19 pandemic.
    I would argue they were essential before the pandemic, and 
will continue to be essential long after the pandemic is 
officially over, who worked so hard to keep us safe, healthy 
and fed every day. Mr. Chairman, at some other opportunity I'd 
engage with these witnesses or other experts, with the question 
of what the impact would be on our food supply chain, the cost 
of fruits and vegetables if we do not have the immigrants that 
we do at the agricultural sector.
    Chairman Whitehouse. We actually had some testimony on that 
during an exchange between Senator Graham and Mr. Bier.
    Senator Padilla. Excellent. I'm sorry I missed it, but will 
replay the tape. But at the end of the day we need to look past 
the partisan games, and understand that no one wins when we 
continue to fail to reform our immigration system. The future 
of our economy, for those who come here for a better life, and 
for American citizens, depends on our ability to come together 
to fix this outdated and broken system.
    I look forward to working with my colleagues to do exactly 
that. Thank you again, Mr. Chair.
    Chairman Whitehouse. Thank you very much Senator Padilla. 
The hearing is adjourned. I am grateful to the witnesses for 
your participation and your testimony.
    [Whereupon, at 11:56 a.m. Wednesday, September 13, 2023, 
the hearing was adjourned.]

[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                 [all]