[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 150 (2004), Part 19]
[Senate]
[Pages 25934-25937]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                          OFFSHORE OUTSOURCING

  Mr. LIEBERMAN. Mr. President, on December 15, 2004, my office 
released a white paper entitled ``Data Dearth in Offshore Outsourcing: 
Policymaking Requires Facts.'' This white paper is closely linked to a 
previous white paper entitled ``Offshore Outsourcing and America's 
Competitive Edge: Losing Out in the High Technology R&D and Services 
Sectors.'' The latter was released by my office in May 2004. A summary 
of that report appeared in the Record on May 21, 2004.
  A key conclusion of the May paper was the absence of reliable data to 
measure and assess the offshore outsourcing phenomenon. We do not have 
good data on the offshoring problem, and the data we have are general 
in nature. Estimates vary widely on the number of jobs moving overseas, 
and the lack of reliable data contributes to incorrect conclusions 
about the impacts of offshore outsourcing, which can result in flawed 
policy responses. We need data to understand what we are facing so we 
can chart a sure and steady course for the future. There is enough 
anecdotal data about job losses to spark debate and, in some cases, 
result in policies which may provide a short-term fix but which do not 
produce longer term solutions to preserve U.S. innovation and ensure 
U.S. competitiveness. Comprehensive and balanced data on both job gains 
and job losses resulting from offshore outsourcing are essential. This 
data must be assembled by U.S. Federal Government agencies, including 
the Department of Commerce and the Department of Labor, where data-
gathering capabilities are extensive and research methodologies are 
transparent.
  The lack of data is critical because the issues raised in the May 
white paper are so important. The white paper was designed to stimulate 
a deeper review of the long-term implications for our policy responses 
and to change the terms of the debate on offshore outsourcing. The 
paper looked at rising global competition and the challenges posed to 
America's competitive advantage. Globalization is our current and 
future reality; there is no escaping it. The U.S. economy is 
inextricably linked to the rest of the world; our fortunes rise and 
fall depending on our performance with our trading partners and our 
competitors. Our strength and success with China, India, and other 
emerging markets is as important to future U.S. economic and national 
security as the competition with Japan and Europe was to U.S. growth 
over the last 50 years. The offshore outsourcing phenomenon is one of 
the challenging manifestations of globalization.
  The May white paper found that it was not just manufacturing jobs 
that are subject to global outsourcing--where 2.7 million jobs have 
disappeared since 2000--but service sector and high-end R&D jobs are 
also being hit by offshore outsourcing. And it is not just call 
centers, data entry facilities, and other entry-level service jobs that 
are impacted by offshore outsourcing. Higher skill professional jobs--
from engineering, computer chip design to nanotechnology R&D--are 
beginning to go overseas, and with these jobs, we may be losing key 
parts of the talent and technology which fueled the record growth and 
prosperity of the 1990s. Fundamental changes are facing us, as key 
components of our innovation infrastructure--knowledge, capital, labor, 
technology and facilities--are increasingly mobile. Offshore 
outsourcing of labor, capital, and technology not only hurts workers 
but threatens our knowledge-based economy. If engineering, design, R&D, 
and services follow manufacturing abroad, U.S. competitiveness is 
weakened, and our economic prosperity and national security are 
threatened.
  What is at stake is the ability of the United States to remain a 
global leader in innovation, to maintain good-paying jobs, and to 
expand our global market share. We must rethink long-term strategies on 
competitiveness, innovation, R&D, trade policy, and enforcement, as 
well as education and investments in human capital. However, we cannot 
begin to develop effective solutions until we have an understanding of 
the scope of the offshore outsourcing phenomenon. The need for data on 
offshore outsourcing is paramount.
  Lord Kelvin, the 19th century Belfast-born physicist said:

       When you can measure what you are speaking about and 
     express it in numbers, you know something about it; but when 
     you cannot measure it, when you cannot express it in numbers, 
     your knowledge is of the meager and unsatisfactory kind.

  That was in a May 3, 1883 lecture to the Institute of Civil 
Engineers.
  By improving U.S. Government data collection, we can ensure that our 
knowledge of offshore outsourcing is neither meager nor unsatisfactory, 
but informed and balanced. With improved data and analysis, we will 
build constructive and lasting solutions to address the challenges 
posed by offshore outsourcing.
  I would like to thank Sara E. Hagigh of my staff and Mary Jane Bolle 
of the Congressional Research Service for their hard work in 
researching and preparing this report.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have excerpts from the 
white paper printed in the Congressional Record.
  The material follows:

                   Excerpt 1, Summary of White Paper

       The issue of offshore outsourcing has been at the center of 
     many key political and public debates over the last few 
     years. The term ``outsourcing'' has become part of our 
     everyday lexicon, gracing the covers of news magazines, 
     television broadcasts, and playing a central role in 
     Congressional debates during an election year. Most Americans 
     are aware of the issue of offshore outsourcing, but few of us 
     have an understanding of the full dimensions of the problem.
       To develop a better understanding of offshore outsourcing, 
     my office released a white paper in May 2004 entitled 
     ``Offshore Outsourcing and America's Competitive Edge: Losing 
     Out in the High Technology R&D and Services Sectors.'' The 
     white paper found that it is not only manufacturing jobs that 
     are being outsourced overseas, where 2.7 million jobs have 
     disappeared since 2000. Offshore outsourcing has also begun 
     to hit high-end services and R&D jobs, and there is evidence 
     that it is not just call centers, data entry and other entry-
     level service jobs that are impacted by offshoring. We are 
     beginning to send higher skill professional jobs overseas--
     including engineering, computer chip design and 
     nanotechnology R&D, and with these jobs, we may be losing the 
     talent and technology that created the growth of the 1990s. 
     The white paper concluded that offshore outsourcing of high-
     end services and R&D jobs could threaten our innovation 
     infrastructure, and therefore our economic prosperity, and 
     our national security.
       A key conclusion of the white paper was the absence of 
     reliable data to measure and assess the offshore outsourcing 
     phenomenon. Estimates vary widely on the number of jobs 
     moving overseas, and the lack of reliable data contributes to 
     incorrect conclusions about the impacts of offshore 
     outsourcing. The result is flawed and ineffective policy 
     responses. In order to develop effective policies to address 
     the many facets of the offshore outsourcing challenge--
     including investments in education and human capital, greater 
     investments in Federal, industrial, and services R&D, and 
     better enforcement of our trade agreements--we must have 
     better, more reliable data.
       This paper provides a review and assessment of Federal data 
     on offshore outsourcing:
       1. It begins by identifying a series of questions that 
     would produce useful data to measure offshore outsourcing. 
     These questions address information about job ``losses'' as 
     well as job ``gains'' from offshore outsourcing so we can 
     arrive at a balanced assessment of the impacts of offshore 
     outsourcing.
       2. The report then surveys ten existing U.S. government 
     data sets, from the Departments of Labor and Commerce, 
     measuring aspects of offshore outsourcing. The report 
     enumerates strengths and weaknesses of

[[Page 25935]]

     each of the ten data sets in measuring offshore outsourcing 
     and identifies which federal agency data best answer the 
     questions posed in Table 1 of the report--Useful Data to 
     Measure Offshore Outsourcing. The report also contains Table 
     2 (Aspects of Offshore Outsourcing Potentially Measurable 
     with Existing Data), Table 3 (Legislative Recommendations for 
     Improving Federal Agency Data on Offshore Outsourcing), 
     Appendix A (Federal Agency Data's Strengths and Weaknesses 
     for Measuring Offshore Outsourcing) and Appendix B (Major 
     U.S. trading partners).
       3. Finally, the report makes five legislative 
     recommendations for improving Federal agency data to provide 
     a more useful measure of offshore outsourcing. The five 
     recommendations (summarized in Table 3, Legislative 
     Recommendations for Improving Federal Agency Data on Offshore 
     Outsourcing) are:
       a. Extend the Trade Adjustment Assistance Program;
       b. Require the Office of Trade Adjustment Assistance to 
     report data;
       c. Require Bureau of Labor Statistics to make changes to 
     Mass Layoff data program;
       d. Require the Commerce Department to publish annual 
     multipliers; and
       e. Link Bureau of Economic Analysis and Bureau of Labor 
     Statistics data sets.
       This report represents a beginning, not the end. We must 
     develop reliable and comprehensive data-gathering 
     capabilities at U.S. government agencies to measure 
     employment and economic effects of offshore outsourcing. 
     Without a better understanding of the scope of the problem, 
     effective policy solutions to offshore outsourcing cannot be 
     developed.
       This is the fifth major white paper in a recent series on 
     U.S. economic growth my office has released. The four 
     previous papers are:
       1. ``Offshore Outsourcing and America's Competitive Edge: 
     Losing Out in the High Technology R&D and Services Sectors,'' 
     May 11, 2004.
       2. ``Making America Stronger: A Report with Legislative 
     Recommendations on Restoration of U.S. Manufacturing,'' 
     September 2003.
       3. ``National Security Aspects of the Global Migration of 
     the U.S. Semiconductor Industry,'' June 2003.
       4. ``Broadband: A 21st Century Technology and Productivity 
     Strategy,'' May 2002.

Excerpt 2, Data We Would Like To Have: Useful Data To Measure Offshore 
                              Outsourcing

       In a perfect world, data on offshore outsourcing and its 
     impact on the U.S. economy would be available to answer 
     questions about job losses from offshore outsourcing and 
     counterbalancing job gains. An assessment of the impact of 
     offshore outsourcing on U.S. employment levels and the 
     overall economy must balance both job gains and job losses. 
     Table 1 on p. 12 sets out these questions together with 
     short-hand answers on where the data can be found to respond 
     to each question. This report will then analyze and assess 
     all Federal agency data on offshore outsourcing.
       In prioritizing data needs, it would be most important to 
     have data to answer the questions in Part A and Part B of 
     Table 1--a total of 10 questions. Part A includes 6 questions 
     on job losses from offshore outsourcing and Part B poses 4 
     questions on counterbalancing job gains. If data were 
     available to answer all of the questions in Parts A and B in 
     Table 1, the result would be a reasonably good picture of the 
     positive and negative effects of offshore outsourcing on the 
     U.S. economy, as well as on industries, States, and 
     localities, and their workers. After data in Parts A and B 
     are gathered, it would be useful to have the data in Part C 
     of Table 1, which address 7 specific questions including the 
     role of visa programs in offshoring operations and the impact 
     of offshore outsourcing on career choices of U.S. students.
       Table 1 shows that almost no data are being made available 
     at this time to provide answers to any of the questions in 
     Table 1. Much of the data is either unpublished or not being 
     collected. Some data relating to U.S. exports and U.S. 
     foreign direct investment (both foreign and domestic) are 
     gathered by the Department of Commerce, but for the more 
     detailed questions relating to offshore outsourcing (listed 
     in Part C of Table 1), no U.S. government agency collects the 
     data. The unavailability of basic data to answer the 
     questions in Parts A and B (job losses and job gains from 
     offshore outsourcing) is in sharp contrast to the 
     comprehensive data that were available to answer similar 
     questions related to Mexico and Canada under the North 
     American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). These data were 
     available between 1994 and 2003 but are no longer being 
     published.

                       Excerpt 3, Recommendations

       The next section outlines five legislative recommendations 
     that might be taken to produce data that would offer some 
     estimates of the extent and nature of offshore outsourcing. 
     These recommendations range from amending existing 
     legislation to increasing Federal agency reporting 
     requirements.


 recommendation 1: extend the trade adjustment assistance (taa) program

       One recommendation is to extend the TAA program to cover 
     two groups of workers not presently covered who lose their 
     jobs to offshore outsourcing: a) all service sector workers; 
     and b) workers producing ``articles'' who are currently not 
     covered under Sec. 113 of Title I of the Trade Act of 2002 
     (P.L. 107-210). Sec. 113 provides TAA benefits to workers if 
     they lose their jobs due to shifts in production to certain 
     countries, primarily countries with which the United States 
     has a trade agreement or a trade preference program (see 
     footnote 29 for a list of these 72 countries).
       On the first issue of covering all displaced service sector 
     workers, there are a number of benefits in making this change 
     to the legislation authorizing the TAA program. Aside from 
     issues of equality in having the Trade Adjustment Assistance 
     Program cover all workers who lose their jobs to offshore 
     outsourcing, extending the program would result in data 
     covering virtually the complete range of jobs lost to 
     offshore outsourcing. From these data, analysts could 
     estimate the effects of offshore outsourcing on the Nation as 
     a whole, on individual industries, and on States and 
     localities. One drawback of expanding the TAA program to 
     provide benefits to services workers whose jobs are lost to 
     offshore outsourcing is that the program would cost more. No 
     estimate has been made on additional costs to the TAA program 
     resulting from covering services workers who lose their jobs 
     due to offshore outsourcing.
       Legislation has been introduced in the 108th Congress to 
     extend the TAA program to cover service sector workers. 
     Senator Lieberman co-sponsored ``The Services Workers 
     Fairness Act'' (S. 2143), introduced by Senator Durbin, to 
     ensure that services workers losing their jobs to offshoring 
     are eligible for TAA benefits. Senator Lieberman also 
     supported an amendment to the Senate version of the Foreign 
     Sales Corporation-Extraterritorial Income Act bill (S. 1637) 
     introduced by Senators Wyden, Coleman, and Rockefeller to 
     extend the TAA program to cover services workers. While the 
     amendment failed to pass, Congress must continue efforts to 
     extend TAA benefits to all Americans who lose their jobs due 
     to offshoring, including services workers.
       The second change to the TAA program would extend the TAA 
     program to cover workers producing articles whose job 
     relocates to any country. This provision was included in the 
     Senate-passed version of the TAA reauthorization, included in 
     the Trade Act of 2002, however it was yielded in the 
     Conference committee [See Trade Act of 2002, Conference 
     Report 107-624, July 26, 2002, p. 122.]. Under existing law, 
     TAA benefits go to workers who lose jobs when their firms 
     have shifted production to a country which: a) has a free 
     trade agreement with the United States; b) is a beneficiary 
     country under the Andean Trade Preference Act, the African 
     Growth and Opportunity Act, or the Caribbean Basin Economic 
     Recovery Act; or c) is likely to be an increase in imports to 
     the United States of articles like or directly competitive 
     with those the job loser produced. (Sec. 113, P.L. 107-210).
       A review of the Department of Labor-Employment and Training 
     Agency's website on the TAA program shows that there are 72 
     countries that meet these requirements for shifts in 
     production (see footnote 29 of this report for the list of 
     countries). Yet, there are 148 members of the World Trade 
     Organization, and important trading partners and key 
     outsourcing destinations--like China and India--are not on 
     the list for shifts in production. This is a significant 
     limitation in the TAA program. At a minimum, the list of 
     eligible countries for production shifts should be expanded 
     to include all WTO members--currently 148 countries.


recommendation 2: require the office of trade adjustment assistance to 
                              report data

       A second recommendation is to require the Office of Trade 
     Adjustment Assistance to report data which it is already 
     collecting on applications for TAA certification. A database 
     for such reported data could include the following categories 
     of information for certified workers: Name of company, 
     location of business, products produced and North American 
     Industry Classification System (NAICS) industry code, place 
     to which production has shifted, or from which new imports 
     are being sourced, reason for the offshore outsourcing 
     (imports or production shift) and number of workers affected.
       Publishing data of this type would not be new for the TAA 
     Office. Under the NAFTA-TAA program the office made available 
     data on certifications: a) By number of workers affected; b) 
     by industry code; c) by State and locality of the job losers; 
     and d) by country source of the job loss (i.e., the country 
     which was the source of imports or the target of the 
     production shift). These data are potentially the best, most 
     complete data available because: a) They are a direct count 
     of the estimated number of workers potentially affected by 
     the various offshore outsourcing events; and b) they are 
     required, not voluntary, on the part of applicants for 
     certification.
       Despite these benefits, TAA data are an imperfect measure 
     of the total jobs lost to

[[Page 25936]]

     offshore outsourcing. They do not measure service-producing 
     jobs outsourced offshore (with a few minor exceptions), and 
     they do not measure all goods-producing jobs outsourced 
     offshore. Other imperfections are that: a) They measure 
     potential, not actual job loss, some of which may not 
     actually have occurred; and b) they fail to measure tertiary 
     jobs lost (e.g., independent service sector jobs which 
     support goods-production operations outsourced offshore, such 
     as those in stores in areas hit by closures).


   recommendation 3: require bls to make changes in mass layoff data 
                                program

       Three requirements could improve data being reported by the 
     Bureau of Labor Statistics on the Extended Mass Layoffs 
     Associated with Domestic and Overseas Relocations Survey: 1) 
     Reduce survey size to businesses with 25 layoffs; 2) 
     disaggregate (separate into component parts) data on movement 
     of work; and 3) report data annually instead of quarterly.
       (1) Reduce Survey Size to Businesses With 25 Layoffs. The 
     Extended Mass Layoff Survey, which contains a question on 
     movement of work, could be conducted on businesses which lay 
     off 25 or more workers instead of businesses which lay off 50 
     or more workers as is currently the case. A reduction in the 
     size of the companies surveyed would capture more layoff 
     events and increase the share of offshore outsourcing 
     instances reported.
       BLS officials estimate that expanding the Mass Layoff 
     Survey to layoffs of 25 workers or more would allow the 
     program to identify more than double the number of potential 
     layoff events requiring a telephone interview. BLS officials 
     estimate that such an expansion in the MLS survey program 
     will require $3.3 million in additional funds, including 3 
     full time equivalent employees. Of this total, $2.7 million 
     would go to States for the MLS employer interview and related 
     activity. The remaining $600,000 would support BLS data 
     collection, analysis, and publication activities.
       Reducing the size of the business surveyed in the Extended 
     Mass Layoff Survey does not alter the weaknesses of such data 
     and survey methods, namely that the survey is voluntary and 
     the quality of results depends on who in the organization 
     responds to the survey and their knowledge of the causes of 
     jobs going offshore. BLS officials also raised concerns about 
     extra reporting burdens by reducing the size of business 
     surveyed.
       (2) Disaggregate Data on Movement of Work. BLS could be 
     required to disaggregate (separate into component parts) and 
     report separately detailed data on the two categories of 
     ``movement of work''--movement of work to another location 
     inside the United States versus movement of work to another 
     location outside the United States. Detailed data to be 
     reported could include distribution of layoffs by industry or 
     region of the country affected by the layoff.
       Many believe that disaggregating the data is the only way 
     to make the data on movement of work useful. In its current 
     form, data on offshore outsourcing are imbedded in data on 
     movement of work within the United States, thus the data are 
     not useful for measuring offshore outsourcing except for a 
     few summary numbers.
       Even with greater data disaggregation, the Extended Mass 
     Layoff Survey remains voluntary. It is widely believed that 
     companies are reluctant to reveal data on offshore 
     outsourcing, although BLS reports a better than 90 percent 
     response rate in the Extended Mass Layoff Survey in each of 
     the first three quarters of 2004. As previously noted, the 
     quality of survey responses depends on the company contact 
     person who may not readily have answers about whether the 
     ``movement of work'' is to an offshore location or to another 
     location in the United States. Companies will likely argue 
     that providing this level of detail presents additional 
     burdens, both from a personnel and a financial point of view.
       (3) Report Data Annually. The Department of Labor-Bureau of 
     Labor Statistics could be required to report the Extended 
     Mass Layoff Survey data annually instead of quarterly. Annual 
     reporting would enable more detail to be published, since 
     privacy rules prohibit the reporting of survey data which 
     represents a sample size of fewer than three businesses.
       Annual reporting of data would not solve the survey's 
     limitations, namely that reporting is voluntary, results 
     depend on who responds to the survey, and the additional 
     reporting burdens placed on businesses. However, we could 
     gain very helpful data if this recommendation was 
     implemented.


      Recommendation 4: Require DOC to Publish Annual Multipliers

       The Department of Commerce should be required to publish 
     annual ``multipliers'' showing for goods and services 
     separately and combined, the number of jobs supporting a 
     billion dollars worth of exports in each category. The 
     product of the multipliers and the value of exports can then 
     yield an estimate of the total number of U.S. jobs producing 
     for export. Comparing the number of workers producing for 
     export across years yields an estimate of job ``gains'' from 
     exports over time. These job gain estimates could provide an 
     important context for estimates of job losses and are 
     necessary to provide a full assessment of the effects of 
     offshore outsourcing.
       Some updating of the model used to prepare the job gains 
     from trade estimates would likely be required in order to 
     produce these data on an annual basis.


              Recommendation 5: Link BEA and BLS Data Sets

       The Department of Commerce-Bureau of Economic Analysis and 
     the Department of Labor-Bureau of Labor Statistics should be 
     required to link their data sets, which could provide 
     synergies. BEA could link its data on multinational 
     corporations with relevant BLS data--including occupational 
     data and movement of work data in the Extended Mass Layoff 
     Survey. Both BEA and BLS would be required to be transparent 
     regarding their data collection methodologies. While there 
     may be some value in sharing data and identifying greater 
     detail on wages, occupation and skill level of jobs going 
     overseas, there is no certainty that providing these data 
     links will improve the quality of data on offshore 
     outsourcing. Such data linkages may be more valuable after 
     BEA and BLS improve their individual agency's data collection 
     on offshore outsourcing, by implementing the recommendations 
     in this report and any other suggestions to be developed. 
     However, data linkages could provide important additional 
     perspectives.

                         Excerpt 4, Conclusion

       If all of these legislative recommendations are followed, 
     Congress would have available more accurate data on the 
     phenomenon of offshore outsourcing. This could include better 
     estimates of how many jobs--both goods-producing jobs and 
     services producing jobs--are being outsourced to other 
     countries. From the Trade Adjustment Assistance database, 
     that would be equivalent to the data available between 1994 
     and 2002 under NAFTA. Data would be available for the United 
     States as a whole and by State, on how many jobs were being 
     ``lost'' by industry, by city, by cause (imports or 
     production shifts), and by country to which jobs were being 
     transferred. Congress would also have available estimates on 
     U.S. jobs ``created'' to balance jobs lost to offshore 
     outsourcing. These new jobs would represent U.S. jobs 
     supporting new exports and U.S. jobs supported by new foreign 
     direct investment in the United States.
       These data, providing U.S. government estimates of the 
     magnitude of job ``losses'' from offshore outsourcing and 
     counterbalancing job ``gains'' from new exports and foreign 
     direct investment in the United States, could assist Congress 
     in making a variety of informed policy decisions. In a 
     narrower sense, these policy decisions would help displaced 
     workers become employed in new jobs or help critical U.S. 
     industries maintain a presence in the United States. In a 
     broader sense, the data would help Congress make more 
     informed decisions which could affect both the short-range 
     and long-term economic health and welfare of the United 
     States, its industries, and its citizens.

          TABLE 1.--USEFUL DATA TO MEASURE OFFSHORE OUTSOURCING
           [Table prepared by Congressional Research Service]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                           Location where answers can be
                Question                               found
------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. Questions about job ``losses'' from
 offshore outsourcing:
    1. How many business operations are   Unpublished Trade Adjustment
     moving offshore?.                     Assistance (TAA) data for
                                           covered countries; minimal
                                           data available in Bureau of
                                           Labor Statistics (BLS) Mass
                                           Layoff Survey.
    2. What industries are affected?....  Unpublished TAA data.
    3. From what states and localities    Unpublished TAA data.
     are they moving?.
    4. To which countries are businesses  Unpublished TAA data.
     shifting production?.
    5. How many workers are affected, by  Unpublished TAA data.
     state, by industry, by cause
     (imports vs. production shift) and
     by country to which the plant is
     relocating or from which imports
     are arriving?.
    6. What is the re-employment          BLS worker displacement
     experience of those workers           surveys (some useful
     displaced by offshore outsourcing     estimates).
     (level and new wages and type of
     new jobs)?.
B. Questions about counterbalancing job
 ``gains'' from offshore outsourcing:
    1. How much are exports increasing?.  Available Department of
                                           Commerce export data; Census
                                           & BEA data.
    2. What is the extent of job gains    Unpublished DOC jobs
     associated with increased exports?.   multiplier.
    3. What is the extent of new foreign  Available DOC-BEA data.
     direct investment in the United
     States?.
    4. What is the extent of job          Available BEA data.
     ``gains'' from foreign direct
     investment in the United States?.

[[Page 25937]]

 
C. Additional questions for which data
 on offshore outsourcing would be useful
 include:
 
  [The first six questions on the list,
   plus the question on re-employment
 prospects of dislocated workers (Pt. A,
 question 6), were developed by Dr. Ron
 Hira, P.E., Assistant Professor, Public
     Policy, Rochester Institute of
               Technology]
 
    1. What are the number and types of   No data are available.
     jobs moving offshore by occupation,
     skill level, and wages?.
    2. What are the number and types of   Some BEA data are available by
     jobs created overseas by U.S.-owned   affiliates, employment data
     companies for the purpose of          are not.
     exporting to U.S. markets compared
     to those created to serve foreign
     markets?.
    3. What are the numbers and types of  Some BEA data are available by
     jobs created in the United States     affiliates, employment data
     by foreign-owned companies for the    are not.
     purpose of selling in the U.S.
     market compared to those created to
     produce exports for overseas
     market?.
    4. What are the companies' near-term  No data are available.
     and long-range plans for relocating
     facilities and transferring jobs to
     overseas locations?.
    5. What is the impact of offshore     No data are available.
     outsourcing on academic and career
     choices by American students?.
    6. What is the role of H-1B and L-1   No data are available.
     temporary visa programs on offshore
     operations by U.S. and foreign
     companies?.
    7. How many and what types of         No data are available.
     research and development jobs are
     being sent offshore?.
------------------------------------------------------------------------


                                          

                          ____________________