[Congressional Record Volume 159, Number 24 (Thursday, February 14, 2013)]
[Senate]
[Pages S736-S737]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
Global Battle For Talent
Mr. President, I am thankful for the opportunity to be on the Senate
floor today to continue to tell my colleagues about the issues of
entrepreneurship and the global battle for talent, the opportunity to
start businesses, and the challenges we face from other countries in
competing in this global economy.
From our Nation's earliest days, entrepreneurs have been the driving
force behind U.S. economic growth and expansion. Yet the state of
entrepreneurship in America is not as strong as it once was. In today's
global economy, an entrepreneur has more choices than ever about where
to start his or her business.
Over the last 2 years, at least seven other countries have taken
action to better support and attract entrepreneurs. In the 2-plus years
I have been a member of the Senate, seven countries have changed their
policies, their laws, and their regulations to be attractive to
entrepreneurs, while we have not. This map shows those countries--
Russia, Singapore, Australia, Brazil, Chile, Canada, and the United
Kingdom.
I recently shared what Canada was doing to attract more
entrepreneurs, and today I will share what is happening in the United
Kingdom and explain why it is in our country's best interests to act
quickly to retain highly skilled and entrepreneurial immigrants.
Much like the United States, the UK had a range of visa categories
for immigrants with varying skills and financial resources. But in
2011, the UK Government made changes to simplify their visa rules in
order to attract more talented entrepreneurs to their country. The UK
recently created an entirely new type of visa for what they call
``prospective entrepreneurs.'' These individuals are allowed to enter
the UK for a set period of time to secure funding and start the process
of setting up their businesses before they begin the traditional visa
process. Raising capital can be one of the more challenging aspects of
starting a new business, and this visa gives entrepreneurs a running
start.
The UK has also changed its top visa category, tier 1, to be
restricted to entrepreneurs, investors, and the exceptionally talented.
Those entrepreneurs falling within the tier 1 category must have set up
or taken over a British business. The initial investment in their
companies can be as little as 50,000 pounds, given that certain
criteria are met. By lowering the initial capital investment required,
entrepreneurs can get set up and running their businesses sooner rather
than just raising more money.
The UK has also revamped its Global Entrepreneurs Programme, which
works to encourage innovative technology businesses to relocate to the
UK. The program is aimed specifically at foreign entrepreneurs and
offers a range of support to startups, from help in raising capital to
providing mentors to offering networking opportunities with successful
entrepreneurs. This program has helped more than 200 entrepreneurs and
early-stage technology companies get established in the United Kingdom
so far.
You can see from this poster, Sir Richard Branson is helping promote
this program because he knows firsthand the value of entrepreneurship.
Many people today know Richard Branson as the creator of Virgin
Airways, but he got his start at the young age of 16 by successfully
launching a new student magazine. Now, 45 years later, his investment
group employs approximately 50,000 people in 34 countries and its
revenues in 2011 were around $21 billion.
The UK's Immigration Minister said this about the country's recent
efforts to attract more startup companies:
Entrepreneurs and investors can play a major part in our
economic recovery, and I want to do everything I can to
ensure that Britain remains an attractive destination for
them. Last year we issued far too few visas to those who wish
to set up a business and invest in the UK--I intend to change
that.
That was the Immigration Minister of the UK speaking. And this is our
competition.
We in Congress and the administration need to take notice. Other
countries are aggressively courting entrepreneurs and those talented
individuals will not sit on the sideline with their good ideas. They
will go to the country that welcomes them and set up shop.
A story I heard while visiting Silicon Valley recently illustrates
this point. A large company that was just a few years ago a startup
itself told me they had plans to hire 68 highly skilled immigrants but
could not get visas for them to work in the United States.
Rather than letting that talent go, the company hired them but in a
different country. While it is troubling to me that we lost 68 jobs
because there was no visa for them--we lost those jobs here in the
United States and the visa program didn't work to attract and retain
them--what troubles me even more than that is we know that someone--and
maybe several of those 68 people hired--will go on to start a business
that may result in significant job creation. Those are jobs that could
have been created in the United States but now will be created in
another country.
There is a global battle for entrepreneurial talent, and the United
States is falling behind. When we lose those entrepreneurs and highly
skilled immigrants, we lose the jobs they create. This is certainly
about the entrepreneurs, but it is more about the folks whom they will
employ--folks here in the United States who are in desperate need of
employment.
The legislation that led to changes in the UK's visa law was drafted
by Cambridge venture capitalist Alex van Someren. Alex is aware that
here in America there have been recent efforts to attract entrepreneurs
to our country, but the barriers to entry are still higher than in the
United Kingdom. Alex said this in a recent interview he had with
Business Weekly: ``We have beaten the American effort and that is
fabulous news for UK entrepreneurship.''
This might be good news for the United Kingdom, but it is not good
news for Americans. I want to make sure that the first choice for
entrepreneurs looking to start a company remains the United States of
America, and Congress has the responsibility to make certain that
happens.
In a bipartisan effort, Senator Warner, Senator Coons, Senator Blunt,
and others introduced the Startup Act 3.0 yesterday and an identical
bill is being introduced today in the U.S. House of Representatives.
Startup Act 3.0 makes changes to the Federal regulatory process to
lessen government
[[Page S737]]
burdens on job creators, modifies the Tax Code to encourage investment
in new businesses, seeks to accelerate the commercialization of
university federally funded research that can lead to new ventures and,
importantly, provides new opportunities for highly educated and
entrepreneurial immigrants to stay in the United States where their
talents and new ideas can fuel economic growth and, most importantly,
create American jobs.
Startup Act 3.0 creates an entrepreneur's visa for foreign-born
entrepreneurs currently in the United States. Those with a good idea,
capital, and willingness to hire Americans would be able to stay in the
United States and grow their businesses.
In many instances, foreign-born entrepreneurs, here legally, have an
idea and want to begin a company that will employ Americans but are
told their visa does not allow them to remain in the United States.
With few ways to stay, these entrepreneurs are forced to move and to
take their business with them where they will create jobs in other
countries.
I want to make certain America is the best place for entrepreneurs
who want to build in America and hire Americans. Passing Startup Act
3.0 will help make that happen by creating new ways for immigrants
legally in the United States to open a business and to employ our
fellow citizens.
People come from all around the world to the United States. They come
to study and they come to work. They come to live in a place where they
can have the freedom to pursue their dreams. The entrepreneur's visa
would allow these risk-takers to stay here and operate their
businesses.
Each immigrant entrepreneur would be required to create jobs for
Americans. If the business was not successful and the jobs were not
created, the immigrant would have to go back to his or her own home
country.
While some immigrant entrepreneurs would fail, others would follow a
path worn by many who came before them and succeeded. Entrepreneurial
immigrants have long contributed to the strength of our economy by
starting companies and creating jobs. I can think of the Russian
immigrants, for example, who are entrepreneurs in a sense who came to
Kansas and brought hard red winter wheat with them. What a true
entrepreneur--an immigrant entrepreneur--who changed the face of our
State.
On the current Fortune 500 companies, more than 40 percent were
founded by a first- or second-generation American. Not only are these
immigrants entrepreneurial, but they are also disproportionately
innovative. Foreign nationals residing in the United States were named
as investors or coinvestors in a quarter of all patent applications
filed in the United States in 2006.
Today, one of every ten Americans employed in a privately owned U.S.
company works for an immigrant-owned firm. While we work in the United
States to continue educating our children with the skills for a 21st
century economy and training the next generation of great American
entrepreneurs, we also need to welcome those who want to create a
business here in the United States and employ our citizens.
I believe that 80 percent of my colleagues here would agree with the
provisions of Startup Act 3.0. They understand these are important
issues for the economic growth and new job creation for Americans. I
urge my colleagues to pass what we can agree to now and keep working to
find common ground on issues that still divide us. The longer we wait,
the farther we fall behind in this global competition for the most
entrepreneurial immigrants.
While the United Kingdom and other countries are creating new
opportunities for entrepreneurs, the United States remains the land of
opportunity and birthplace of the American dream. We need to pass
Startup Act 3.0 so foreign entrepreneurs can strengthen our economy and
so American business men and women can pursue their dreams here in the
United States.
Millions of our citizens, unfortunately, remain out of work. Many are
underemployed. Our economy is barely growing. We can jump-start the
American economy through Startup Act 3.0, and the skills we need to
pursue the American dream can be here in the United States and we can
strengthen our economy.
Madam President, I suggest the absence of a quorum, and I yield the
floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Ms. Heitkamp). Without objection, it is so
ordered.
The clerk will call the roll.
The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. King). The Senator from Maryland.
Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that I be
permitted to enter into a colloquy with my colleague from Maryland,
Senator Mikulski.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
(The remarks of Mr. Cardin and Ms. Mikulski are printed in today's
Record under ``Morning Business.'')