[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 158 (2012), Part 10]
[House]
[Pages 14534-14544]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                         STEM JOBS ACT OF 2012

  Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass 
the bill (H.R. 6429) to amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to 
promote innovation, investment, and research in the United States, to 
eliminate the diversity immigrant program, and for other purposes.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The text of the bill is as follows:

                               H.R. 6429

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``STEM Jobs Act of 2012''.

     SEC. 2. IMMIGRANT VISAS FOR CERTAIN ADVANCED STEM GRADUATES.

       (a) Worldwide Level of Immigration.--Section 201(d)(2) of 
     the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1151(d)(2)) is 
     amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(D)(i) In addition to the increase provided under 
     subparagraph (C), the number computed under this paragraph 
     for fiscal year 2013 and subsequent fiscal years shall be 
     further increased by the number specified in

[[Page 14535]]

     clause (ii), to be used in accordance with paragraphs (6) and 
     (7) of section 203(b), except that--
       ``(I) immigrant visa numbers made available under this 
     subparagraph but not required for the classes specified in 
     paragraphs (6) and (7) of section 203(b) shall not be counted 
     for purposes of subsection (c)(3)(C); and
       ``(II) for purposes of paragraphs (1) through (5) of 
     section 203(b), the increase under this subparagraph shall 
     not be counted for purposes of computing any percentage of 
     the worldwide level under this subsection.
       ``(ii) The number specified in this clause is 55,000, 
     reduced for any fiscal year by the number by which the number 
     of visas under section 201(e) would have been reduced in that 
     year pursuant to section 203(d) of the Nicaraguan Adjustment 
     and Central American Relief Act (8 U.S.C. 1151 note) if 
     section 201(e) had not been repealed by section 3 of the STEM 
     Jobs Act of 2012.
       ``(iii) Immigrant visa numbers made available under this 
     subparagraph for fiscal year 2013, but not used for the 
     classes specified in paragraphs (6) and (7) of section 203(b) 
     in such year, may be made available in subsequent years as if 
     they were included in the number specified in clause (ii), 
     but only to the extent to which the cumulative number of 
     petitions under section 204(a)(1)(F), and applications for a 
     labor certification under section 212(a)(5)(A), filed in 
     fiscal year 2013 with respect to aliens seeking a visa under 
     paragraph (6) or (7) of section 203(b) was less than the 
     number specified in clause (ii) for such year. Such immigrant 
     visa numbers may only be made available in fiscal years after 
     fiscal year 2013 in connection with a petition under section 
     204(a)(1)(F), or an application for a labor certification 
     under section 212(a)(5)(A), that was filed in fiscal year 
     2013.
       ``(iv) Immigrant visa numbers made available under this 
     subparagraph for fiscal year 2014, but not used for the 
     classes specified in paragraphs (6) and (7) of section 203(b) 
     during such year, may be made available in subsequent years 
     as if they were included in the number specified in clause 
     (ii), but only to the extent to which the cumulative number 
     of petitions under section 204(a)(1)(F), and applications for 
     a labor certification under section 212(a)(5)(A), filed in 
     fiscal year 2014 with respect to aliens seeking a visa under 
     paragraph (6) or (7) of section 203(b) was less than the 
     number specified in clause (ii) for such year. Such immigrant 
     visa numbers may only be made available in fiscal years after 
     fiscal year 2014 in connection with a petition under section 
     204(a)(1)(F), or an application for a labor certification 
     under section 212(a)(5)(A), that was filed in fiscal year 
     2014.''.
       (b) Numerical Limitation to Any Single Foreign State.--
     Section 202(a)(5)(A) of such Act (8 U.S.C. 1152(a)(5)(A)) is 
     amended by striking ``or (5)'' and inserting ``(5), (6), or 
     (7)''.
       (c) Preference Allocation for Employment-Based 
     Immigrants.--Section 203(b) of such Act (8 U.S.C. 1153(b)) is 
     amended--
       (1) by redesignating paragraph (6) as paragraph (8); and
       (2) by inserting after paragraph (5) the following:
       ``(6) Aliens holding doctorate degrees from u.s. doctoral 
     institutions of higher education in science, technology, 
     engineering, or mathematics.--
       ``(A) In general.--Visas shall be made available, in a 
     number not to exceed the number specified in section 
     201(d)(2)(D)(ii), to qualified immigrants who--
       ``(i) hold a doctorate degree in a field of science, 
     technology, engineering, or mathematics from a United States 
     doctoral institution of higher education;
       ``(ii) agree to work for a total of not less than 5 years 
     in the aggregate for the petitioning employer or in the 
     United States in a field of science, technology, engineering, 
     or mathematics upon being lawfully admitted for permanent 
     residence; and
       ``(iii) have taken all doctoral courses in a field of 
     science, technology, engineering, or mathematics, including 
     all courses taken by correspondence (including courses 
     offered by telecommunications) or by distance education, 
     while physically present in the United States.
       ``(B) Definitions.--For purposes of this paragraph, 
     paragraph (7), and sections 101(a)(15)(F)(i)(I) and 
     212(a)(5)(A)(iii)(III):
       ``(i) The term `distance education' has the meaning given 
     such term in section 103 of the Higher Education Act of 1965 
     (20 U.S.C. 1003).
       ``(ii) The term `field of science, technology, engineering, 
     or mathematics' means a field included in the Department of 
     Education's Classification of Instructional Programs taxonomy 
     within the summary groups of computer and information 
     sciences and support services, engineering, mathematics and 
     statistics, and physical sciences.
       ``(iii) The term `United States doctoral institution of 
     higher education' means an institution that--

       ``(I) is described in section 101(a) of the Higher 
     Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1001(a)) or is a proprietary 
     institution of higher education (as defined in section 102(b) 
     of such Act (20 U.S.C. 1002(b)));
       ``(II) was classified by the Carnegie Foundation for the 
     Advancement of Teaching on January 1, 2012, as a doctorate-
     granting university with a very high or high level of 
     research activity or classified by the National Science 
     Foundation after the date of enactment of this paragraph, 
     pursuant to an application by the institution, as having 
     equivalent research activity to those institutions that had 
     been classified by the Carnegie Foundation as being 
     doctorate-granting universities with a very high or high 
     level of research activity;
       ``(III) has been in existence for at least 10 years;
       ``(IV) does not provide any commission, bonus, or other 
     incentive payment based directly or indirectly on success in 
     securing enrollments or financial aid to any persons or 
     entities engaged in any recruitment or admission activities 
     for nonimmigrant students or in making decisions regarding 
     the award of student financial assistance to nonimmigrant 
     students; and
       ``(V) is accredited by an accrediting body that is itself 
     accredited either by the Department of Education or by the 
     Council for Higher Education Accreditation.

       ``(C) Labor certification required.--
       ``(i) In general.--Subject to clause (ii), the Secretary of 
     Homeland Security may not approve a petition filed for 
     classification of an alien under subparagraph (A) unless the 
     Secretary of Homeland Security is in receipt of a 
     determination made by the Secretary of Labor pursuant to the 
     provisions of section 212(a)(5)(A), except that the Secretary 
     of Homeland Security may, when the Secretary deems it to be 
     in the national interest, waive this requirement.
       ``(ii) Requirement deemed satisfied.--The requirement of 
     clause (i) shall be deemed satisfied with respect to an 
     employer and an alien in a case in which a certification made 
     under section 212(a)(5)(A)(i) has already been obtained with 
     respect to the alien by that employer.
       ``(7) Aliens holding master's degrees from u.s. doctoral 
     institutions of higher education in science, technology, 
     engineering, or mathematics.--
       ``(A) In general.--Any visas not required for the class 
     specified in paragraph (6) shall be made available to the 
     class of aliens who--
       ``(i) hold a master's degree in a field of science, 
     technology, engineering, or mathematics from a United States 
     doctoral institution of higher education that was either part 
     of a master's program that required at least 2 years of 
     enrollment or part of a 5-year combined baccalaureate-
     master's degree program in such field;
       ``(ii) agree to work for a total of not less than 5 years 
     in the aggregate for the petitioning employer or in the 
     United States in a field of science, technology, engineering, 
     or mathematics upon being lawfully admitted for permanent 
     residence;
       ``(iii) have taken all master's degree courses in a field 
     of science, technology, engineering, or mathematics, 
     including all courses taken by correspondence (including 
     courses offered by telecommunications) or by distance 
     education, while physically present in the United States; and
       ``(iv) hold a baccalaureate degree in a field of science, 
     technology, engineering, or mathematics or in a field 
     included in the Department of Education's Classification of 
     Instructional Programs taxonomy within the summary group of 
     biological and biomedical sciences.
       ``(B) Labor certification required.--
       ``(i) In general.--Subject to clause (ii), the Secretary of 
     Homeland Security may not approve a petition filed for 
     classification of an alien under subparagraph (A) unless the 
     Secretary of Homeland Security is in receipt of a 
     determination made by the Secretary of Labor pursuant to the 
     provisions of section 212(a)(5)(A), except that the Secretary 
     of Homeland Security may, when the Secretary deems it to be 
     in the national interest, waive this requirement.
       ``(ii) Requirement deemed satisfied.--The requirement of 
     clause (i) shall be deemed satisfied with respect to an 
     employer and an alien in a case in which a certification made 
     under section 212(a)(5)(A)(i) has already been obtained with 
     respect to the alien by that employer.
       ``(C) Definitions.--The definitions in paragraph (6)(B) 
     shall apply for purposes of this paragraph.''.
       (d) Procedure for Granting Immigrant Status.--Section 
     204(a)(1)(F) of such Act (8 U.S.C. 1154(a)(1)(F)) is 
     amended--
       (1) by striking ``(F)'' and inserting ``(F)(i)'';
       (2) by striking ``or 203(b)(3)'' and inserting ``203(b)(3), 
     203(b)(6), or 203(b)(7)'';
       (3) by striking ``Attorney General'' and inserting 
     ``Secretary of Homeland Security''; and
       (4) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(ii) The following processing standards shall apply with 
     respect to petitions under clause (i) relating to alien 
     beneficiaries qualifying under paragraph (6) or (7) of 
     section 203(b):
       ``(I) The Secretary of Homeland Security shall adjudicate 
     such petitions not later than 60 days after the date on which 
     the petition is filed. In the event that additional 
     information or documentation is requested by the Secretary 
     during such 60-day period, the Secretary shall adjudicate the 
     petition not later than 30 days after the date on which

[[Page 14536]]

     such information or documentation is received.
       ``(II) The petitioner shall be notified in writing within 
     30 days of the date of filing if the petition does not meet 
     the standards for approval. If the petition does not meet 
     such standards, the notice shall include the reasons 
     therefore and the Secretary shall provide an opportunity for 
     the prompt resubmission of a modified petition.''.
       (e) Labor Certification and Qualification for Certain 
     Immigrants.--Section 212(a)(5) of such Act (8 U.S.C. 
     1182(a)(5)) is amended--
       (1) in subparagraph (A)--
       (A) in clause (ii)--
       (i) in subclause (I), by striking ``, or'' at the end and 
     inserting a semicolon;
       (ii) in subclause (II), by striking the period at the end 
     and inserting ``; or''; and
       (iii) by adding at the end the following:

       ``(III) holds a doctorate degree in a field of science, 
     technology, engineering, or mathematics from a United States 
     doctoral institution of higher education (as defined in 
     section 203(b)(6)(B)(iii)).'';

       (B) by redesignating clauses (ii) through (iv) as clauses 
     (iii) through (v), respectively;
       (C) by inserting after clause (i) the following:
       ``(ii) Job order.--

       ``(I) In general.--An employer who files an application 
     under clause (i) shall submit a job order for the labor the 
     alien seeks to perform to the State workforce agency in the 
     State in which the alien seeks to perform the labor. The 
     State workforce agency shall post the job order on its 
     official agency website for a minimum of 30 days and not 
     later than 3 days after receipt using the employment 
     statistics system authorized under section 15 of the Wagner-
     Peyser Act (29 U.S.C. 49 et seq.).
       ``(II) Links.--The Secretary of Labor shall include links 
     to the official websites of all State workforce agencies on a 
     single webpage of the official website of the Department of 
     Labor.''; and

       (D) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(vi) Processing standards for alien beneficiaries 
     qualifying under paragraphs (6) and (7) of section 203(b).--
     The following processing standards shall apply with respect 
     to applications under clause (i) relating to alien 
     beneficiaries qualifying under paragraph (6) or (7) of 
     section 203(b):

       ``(I) The Secretary of Labor shall adjudicate such 
     applications not later than 180 days after the date on which 
     the application is filed. In the event that additional 
     information or documentation is requested by the Secretary 
     during such 180-day period, the Secretary shall adjudicate 
     the application not later than 60 days after the date on 
     which such information or documentation is received.
       ``(II) The applicant shall be notified in writing within 60 
     days of the date of filing if the application does not meet 
     the standards for approval. If the application does not meet 
     such standards, the notice shall include the reasons 
     therefore and the Secretary shall provide an opportunity for 
     the prompt resubmission of a modified application.''; and

       (2) in subparagraph (D), by striking ``(2) or (3)'' and 
     inserting ``(2), (3), (6), or (7)''.
       (f) GAO Study.--Not later than June 30, 2017, the 
     Comptroller General of the United States shall provide to the 
     Congress the results of a study on the use by the National 
     Science Foundation of the classification authority provided 
     under section 203(b)(6)(B)(iii)(II) of the Immigration and 
     Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1153(b)(6)(B)(iii)(II)), as added 
     by this section.
       (g) Public Information.--The Secretary of Homeland Security 
     shall make available to the public on the official website of 
     the Department of Homeland Security, and shall update not 
     less than monthly, the following information (which shall be 
     organized according to month and fiscal year) with respect to 
     aliens granted status under paragraph (6) or (7) of section 
     203(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 
     1153(b)), as added by this section:
       (1) The name, city, and State of each employer who 
     petitioned pursuant to either of such paragraphs on behalf of 
     one or more aliens who were granted status in the month and 
     fiscal year to date.
       (2) The number of aliens granted status under either of 
     such paragraphs in the month and fiscal year to date based 
     upon a petition filed by such employer.
       (3) The occupations for which such alien or aliens were 
     sought by such employer and the job titles listed by such 
     employer on the petition.
       (h) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall take effect on October 1, 2012, and shall apply with 
     respect to fiscal years beginning on or after such date.

     SEC. 3. ELIMINATION OF DIVERSITY IMMIGRANT PROGRAM.

       (a) Worldwide Level of Diversity Immigrants.--Section 201 
     of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1151) is 
     amended--
       (1) in subsection (a)--
       (A) by inserting ``and'' at the end of paragraph (1);
       (B) by striking ``; and'' at the end of paragraph (2) and 
     inserting a period; and
       (C) by striking paragraph (3); and
       (2) by striking subsection (e).
       (b) Allocation of Diversity Immigrant Visas.--Section 203 
     of such Act (8 U.S.C. 1153) is amended--
       (1) by striking subsection (c);
       (2) in subsection (d), by striking ``(a), (b), or (c),'' 
     and inserting ``(a) or (b),'';
       (3) in subsection (e), by striking paragraph (2) and 
     redesignating paragraph (3) as paragraph (2);
       (4) in subsection (f), by striking ``(a), (b), or (c)'' and 
     inserting ``(a) or (b)''; and
       (5) in subsection (g), by striking ``(a), (b), and (c)'' 
     and inserting ``(a) and (b)''.
       (c) Procedure for Granting Immigrant Status.--Section 204 
     of such Act (8 U.S.C. 1154) is amended--
       (1) by striking subsection (a)(1)(I); and
       (2) in subsection (e), by striking ``(a), (b), or (c)'' and 
     inserting ``(a) or (b)''.
       (d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall take effect on October 1, 2012, and shall apply with 
     respect to fiscal years beginning on or after such date.

     SEC. 4. PERMANENT PRIORITY DATES.

       (a) In General.--Section 203 of the Immigration and 
     Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1153) is amended by adding at the 
     end the following:
       ``(i) Permanent Priority Dates.--
       ``(1) In general.--Subject to subsection (h)(3) and 
     paragraph (2), the priority date for any employment-based 
     petition shall be the date of filing of the petition with the 
     Secretary of Homeland Security (or the Secretary of State, if 
     applicable), unless the filing of the petition was preceded 
     by the filing of a labor certification with the Secretary of 
     Labor, in which case that date shall constitute the priority 
     date.
       ``(2) Subsequent employment-based petitions.--Subject to 
     subsection (h)(3), an alien who is the beneficiary of any 
     employment-based petition that was approvable when filed 
     (including self-petitioners) shall retain the priority date 
     assigned with respect to that petition in the consideration 
     of any subsequently filed employment-based petition 
     (including self-petitions).''.
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) 
     shall take effect on the date of the enactment of this Act 
     and shall apply to aliens who are a beneficiary of a 
     classification petition pending on or after such date.

     SEC. 5. STUDENT VISA REFORM.

       (a) In General.--Section 101(a)(15)(F) of the Immigration 
     and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(F)) is amended to 
     read as follows:
       ``(F) an alien--
       ``(i) who--
       ``(I) is a bona fide student qualified to pursue a full 
     course of study in a field of science, technology, 
     engineering, or mathematics (as defined in section 
     203(b)(6)(B)(ii)) leading to a bachelors or graduate degree 
     and who seeks to enter the United States for the purpose of 
     pursuing such a course of study consistent with section 
     214(m) at an institution of higher education (as described in 
     section 101(a) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 
     1001(a))) or a proprietary institution of higher education 
     (as defined in section 102(b) of such Act (20 U.S.C. 
     1002(b))) in the United States, particularly designated by 
     the alien and approved by the Secretary of Homeland Security, 
     after consultation with the Secretary of Education, which 
     institution shall have agreed to report to the Secretary of 
     Homeland Security the termination of attendance of each 
     nonimmigrant student, and if any such institution fails to 
     make reports promptly the approval shall be withdrawn; or
       ``(II) is engaged in temporary employment for optional 
     practical training related to such alien's area of study 
     following completion of the course of study described in 
     subclause (I);
       ``(ii) who has a residence in a foreign country which the 
     alien has no intention of abandoning, who is a bona fide 
     student qualified to pursue a full course of study, and who 
     seeks to enter the United States temporarily and solely for 
     the purpose of pursuing such a course of study consistent 
     with section 214(m) at an established college, university, 
     seminary, conservatory, academic high school, elementary 
     school, or other academic institution or in a language 
     training program in the United States, particularly 
     designated by the alien and approved by the Secretary of 
     Homeland Security, after consultation with the Secretary of 
     Education, which institution of learning or place of study 
     shall have agreed to report to the Secretary of Homeland 
     Security the termination of attendance of each nonimmigrant 
     student, and if any such institution of learning or place of 
     study fails to make reports promptly the approval shall be 
     withdrawn;
       ``(iii) who is the spouse or minor child of an alien 
     described in clause (i) or (ii) if accompanying or following 
     to join such an alien; or
       ``(iv) who is a national of Canada or Mexico, who maintains 
     actual residence and place of abode in the country of 
     nationality, who is described in clause (i) or (ii) except 
     that the alien's qualifications for and actual course of 
     study may be full or part-time, and who commutes to the 
     United States institution or place of study from Canada or 
     Mexico.''.
       (b) Admission.--Section 214(b) of the Immigration and 
     Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1184(b)) is amended by inserting 
     ``(F)(i),'' before ``(L) or (V)''.
       (c) Conforming Amendment.--Section 214(m)(1) of the 
     Immigration and Nationality

[[Page 14537]]

     Act (8 U.S.C. 1184(m)(1)) is amended, in the matter preceding 
     subparagraph (A), by striking ``(i) or (iii)'' and inserting 
     ``(i), (ii), or (iv)''.
       (d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall take effect on the date of the enactment of this Act 
     and shall apply to nonimmigrants who possess or are granted 
     status under section 101(a)(15)(F) of the Immigration and 
     Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(F)) on or after such 
     date.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
Texas (Mr. Smith) and the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Zoe Lofgren) 
each will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.


                             General Leave

  Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all 
Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend 
their remarks and to include extraneous materials on H.R. 6429 
currently under consideration.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Texas?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  When it comes to STEM fields--science, technology, engineering, and 
math--American universities set the standard. Our STEM graduates create 
the innovations and new businesses that fuel our economic growth and 
create jobs.
  Many of the world's top students come to the U.S. to obtain advanced 
STEM degrees. But what happens to these foreign students after they 
graduate? Under the current system, we educate scientists and engineers 
only to send them back home where they often work for our competitors.
  We could boost economic growth and spur job creation by enabling 
American employers to hire some of the best and brightest graduates of 
U.S. universities. These students become entrepreneurs, patent holders, 
and job creators.
  The STEM Jobs Act makes available 55,000 immigrant visas a year for 
foreign graduates of American universities with advanced degrees in 
STEM fields.
  Three-quarters of likely voters strongly support such legislation, 
and a wide range of trade associations have endorsed this legislation 
as well. These include the Institute for Electrical and Electronics 
Engineers, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, Compete America, the 
Information Technology Industry Council, and the Society for Human 
Resource Management.
  To protect American workers, employers who hire STEM graduates must 
advertise the position; and if a qualified American worker is 
available, the STEM graduate will not be hired.
  This bill makes our immigration system smarter by admitting those who 
have the education and skills America needs. STEM visas are substituted 
for Diversity Visas which invite fraud and pose a security risk.
  The STEM Jobs Act generates jobs, increases economic growth, and 
benefits American businesses. What more do we want?
  Let's put the interest of our country first and support this 
legislation.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time 
as I may consume.
  For more than a decade, I've been working to increase high-skilled 
visas for foreign students with advanced STEM degrees from America's 
greatest research universities. I'm fortunate enough to see firsthand 
the new technologies, the new companies, the new jobs they create every 
day in my district in the Silicon Valley. For that reason, it pains me 
greatly that I cannot support this bill.
  First, although this bill ostensibly seeks to increase STEM visas, it 
appears to have another, in my opinion, more sinister purpose--to 
actually reduce legal immigration levels. The bill does it in two ways.
  On its face, the bill eliminates as many visas as it creates by 
killing the Diversity Visa Program which benefits immigrants from 
countries that have low rates of immigration to the United States. But 
the bill also discreetly ensures that many of the new visas will go 
unused by preventing unused visas after 2014 from flowing to other 
immigrants stuck in decades-long backlogs. This is not the way our 
immigration system works.
  I believe the only reason the bill is written in this fashion is to 
satisfy anti-immigrant organizations that have long lobbied for reduced 
levels of immigration.
  My colleagues on the other side of the aisle are fond of saying that 
while they are opposed to illegal immigration, they are very much in 
favor of legal immigration. But this bill shows the opposite.
  Supporters of legal immigration would not have killed one immigration 
program to benefit another, nor would they agree to a Grover Norquist-
style no-new-immigration pledge that will continue to strangle our 
immigration system for years to come.
  Agreeing to zero-sum rules now means never helping the almost 5 
million legal immigrants currently stuck in backlogs.
  The Republican bill also expressly allows for-profit and online 
schools to participate. While the bill contains language limiting 
immediate participation, it unquestionably opens the door to future 
participation.
  I cannot support a bill that will allow such schools to essentially 
sell visas to rich, young foreigners.
  The vast majority of Democrats in this Chamber strongly support STEM 
visas. I've introduced a bill that creates STEM visas without 
eliminating other visas or including for-profit colleges. It has the 
support of the Black, Hispanic, and Asian Caucus chairs. Bring that to 
the floor, and you'll see strong support from Democrats. It should also 
get strong Republican support.
  Republicans in the past, including very conservative Members, have 
supported STEM legislation that does not eliminate other types of 
visas. In the 110th Congress, I introduced a bill that did just that 
with very conservative Republicans such as Texas Members John Carter 
and Pete Sessions as cosponsors. If they can support new STEM visas 
without offsets, so can Republicans today.
  There is a unique opportunity here to craft a balanced, bipartisan 
bill that can pass the Senate; but our majority has instead chosen to 
jam through a partisan bill that has no chance of becoming law, solely, 
I think, to score political points.
  It seems the only reason they have chosen to pursue this strategy 
right before an election is an attempt to appear more immigrant 
friendly than their record proves them to be and perhaps to curry favor 
with high-tech groups.
  But this is an anti-immigration bill, and it only sets back the high-
skilled visa cause.
  I believe if we take a step back and work in good faith on a 
bipartisan basis, we can pass a STEM bill with overwhelming support. I 
am eager to work with my colleagues on the other side of the aisle to 
do just that. It's the right thing to do for the district I represent, 
and for our country. But this flawed bill is one I cannot support.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, before yielding to the gentleman 
from Texas (Mr. Hall), I'm going to yield myself 1 minute.
  Mr. Speaker, the gentlewoman from California said at least two things 
that are completely inaccurate. Let me correct those statements.
  First, she said this bill is going to reduce immigration and that 
that was somehow the intent behind the bill. The gentlewoman from 
California practiced immigration law, and she knows better than to say 
this. Under this bill, and she knows this to be the case, individuals 
in other employment categories who are waiting for other types of 
employment visas can switch over and apply for these STEM visas if they 
are master's or Ph.D. holders in the STEM fields. There's no limit on 
those. I expect every year that the number of visas that are not used 
directly will be used by these individuals in other employment-based 
categories.
  I want to make the point, too, that America is the most generous 
country in the world. We admit almost 1 million people legally every 
year. That's

[[Page 14538]]

far more than any other nation, and it may well be as many as every 
other country combined.
  The purpose of this bill is not to increase or decrease immigration, 
and I want to make that point, and also the fact that most Americans 
agree with this. Gallup recently reported that four out of five 
Americans do not want to increase the levels of immigration. Only 4 
percent believe that the number of immigrants now entering the U.S. is 
too low. This bill reflects what the American people want.
  Lastly, in regard to for-profit schools, the gentlewoman made light 
of that and seemed to think that this bill was going to be abused by 
those types of institutions.
  First of all, any institution, even if they are profit-making--and 
why do so many Democrats oppose profits and free enterprise? I don't 
know--but any profit-making institution, if they otherwise qualify, 
which is to say if they grant doctorates or master's in STEM fields and 
if they are a research university as deemed by the Carnegie Institute 
of Higher Education, yes, they'll qualify. But I want to say to the 
gentlewoman from California, today, none of those for-profit 
institutions would qualify.

                              {time}  1550

  If they somehow meet the qualifications in the future, why wouldn't 
we want them to be eligible to have their graduates--master's and Ph.D. 
only--apply for these STEM visas?
  I am happy now to yield 2 minutes to the chairman of the Science 
Committee, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hall).
  Mr. HALL. Mr. Speaker, I commend my good friend from Texas, Chairman 
Smith, for his leadership on the bill today.
  As a member of the Science Committee since first elected in 1980, 
I've heard repeatedly of talented foreign students who receive advanced 
degrees from American universities who would like to stay in the United 
States and put those degrees to work and are simply not permitted to do 
so. So they return home to their home country and ended up competing 
with us.
  Likewise, I hear from industry, particularly the technology industry, 
that they have ample jobs to fill, but there are not enough qualified 
Americans to fill those jobs. If this is true, we want those jobs 
filled by Americans and are working to improve STEM education in the 
country. But absent that talent now, and with many of these companies 
already seeking employees overseas, then it seems to me we should take 
advantage of the opportunity in front of us and help those foreign 
students who have received their education in the U.S. remain in the 
U.S.
  I have expressed to the chairman that I remain hopeful that qualified 
Americans should always fill available jobs first, and I understand 
provisions are in place to ensure this. I further appreciate his 
willingness to reach a consensus on broadening institution eligibility. 
We must remember that a large number of well-respected institutions 
across the country only grant degrees as high as a masters, and 
qualified graduates from those universities should also be eligible.
  In closing, I support the bill before us today, with the assurance 
that the chairman will continue to work with the Science Committee and 
with me as we move forward.
  Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent 
to allow the ranking member of the full committee to control the 
remainder of the time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the gentleman from 
Michigan will control the time.
  There was no objection.
  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, it is with great pleasure that I thank the 
gentlelady from California (Ms. Lofgren) and yield her such time as she 
may consume.
  Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. I will be brief. I do feel the need to 
address the issue that the chairman has raised; I think he 
misunderstands the issue.
  We have, in U.S. universities, graduating in STEM fields 10,000 Ph.D. 
and 30,000 masters degrees a year. Assuming that all 40,000 want to 
stay in the United States--and that is not a valid assumption--we will 
not use up all of the 50,000 visas. It is true that the EB2s might 
apply, but many of them did not go to American universities. So the 
easiest way to make sure these visas are not eliminated is to do what 
happens in all the rest of the immigration EB categories, which is to 
allow those visas to flow.
  Finally, I just have to say I have never once been asked by a high-
tech company to have some online university be the awarder of the Ph.D. 
It's not a demand, it's not an interest that anybody in the technology 
field has ever expressed to me.
  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I would now proudly yield 3 minutes to our 
distinguished whip, the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer).
  Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. Speaker, in order to compete in today's global economy, we need 
to attract the best and brightest math and science students from around 
the world. I think we all agree on that.
  American technology and Internet companies--which are far and away 
the best in the world--are in dire need of more highly educated 
engineers and scientists. We're just not producing enough here. In the 
long term, we need to educate more Americans in STEM fields, but we 
also must increase the number of STEM visas so that our businesses can 
hire the top international graduates of American universities.
  This could be a broadly bipartisan bill. It could pass easily. But 
once again, unfortunately, we have chosen a good bill and inserted a 
partisan poison pill, making it impossible to pass the Senate or 
attract broad bipartisan support. How sad it is that that's been the 
history of this Congress. That poison pill is, of course, the 
elimination of the Diversity Visa Program, which ensures that 
individuals from a broad array of countries have the opportunity to 
seek a better life here in America. The Statue of Liberty, with her 
torch raised, is being brought down just a little bit.
  We don't know where our next great innovators will come from, and we 
ought to not close the doors on those who have been waiting patiently 
to have their number called in some far off corner of the world. That 
lottery is not only their salvation, but also our benefit. It's part of 
what makes America great.
  I call on the Republican leadership to withdraw this bill and instead 
take up the bill introduced by my friend, the gentlewoman from 
California, Representative Lofgren, which accomplishes the objective I 
think we all want to accomplish. That version would create 
opportunities through a new STEM visa program without taking current 
opportunities away. I commend Ms. Lofgren for her work on this issue 
and for helping to sustain that yearning for America that still moves 
the hearts of millions around the world.
  In light of what I have just said, Mr. Speaker, I would ask the 
gentleman from Texas if he will yield for the purpose of allowing me to 
make a unanimous consent to amend his bill by striking all after the 
enacting clause and replacing the text with that of the gentlewoman 
from California's alternative, H.R. 6412, the Attracting the Best and 
Brightest Act of 2012. I tell my friend that will accomplish the 
objectives that you've talked about and I've talked about in getting 
high-tech people, the availability, for our companies here in America. 
They need them, we want them, we ought to get them; and we ought to do 
it in a bipartisan way.
  This is an opportunity for bipartisanship that unfortunately has not 
come as often as we would like. I would ask my friend to allow me to 
make that unanimous consent, that we agree to that. And I guarantee the 
gentleman we will get very substantial numbers of votes on this side of 
the aisle for that proposition, and I hope on your side as well.
  Would the gentleman yield for that unanimous consent? The gentleman 
has been instructed not to yield to me for that unanimous consent, I 
understand? I regret that your side of the

[[Page 14539]]

aisle wouldn't give me that opportunity for America--for America and 
our high-tech businesses.
  Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, on the way to yielding to the 
majority leader of the House, I'd like to respond very quickly to what 
the gentleman from Maryland just said.
  I want to make, again, the points that the Diversity Visa invites 
fraud, and absolutely means that we would have a security risk if we 
were to continue it.
  I want to quote the assistant Secretary of State. The assistant 
Secretary of State for Visa Services has testified that Diversity Visa 
fraud includes:

       Multiple entries, fraudulent claims to education or work 
     experience, pop-up spouses or family members, relatives added 
     after the application is submitted, and false claims for 
     employment or financial support in the United States.

  The State Department's Inspector General has testified that the 
Diversity Visa program:

       Contains significant risk to national security from hostile 
     intelligence officers, criminals and terrorists attempting to 
     use the program for entry into the United States as permanent 
     residents.

  We've already had one individual who was admitted on a Diversity Visa 
try to blow up the World Trade Center in 1993. He killed six people and 
injured hundreds of people. That's why this program is not good for 
this country.
  I'm more than happy to yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Virginia 
(Mr. Cantor), the majority leader for the House of Representatives.
  Mr. CANTOR. I thank the gentleman from Texas for his leadership on 
this bill.
  Mr. Speaker, since we were elected to the majority, the House 
Republicans have put forward solutions to spur job creation and 
economic growth by, frankly, focusing on and helping small businesses 
get off the ground to grow and hire. We've worked hard to drive small 
business job creation and innovation by enacting patent reform, the 
JOBS Act, and the removal of regulatory and tax burdens that are 
impeding small businesses' growth.
  The STEM Jobs Act we are voting on today is part of our commitment to 
help small businesses, to help them create jobs by ensuring that top 
foreign students in American universities have the opportunity to 
launch or work for American businesses.
  The bipartisan STEM Jobs Act takes 55,000 visas currently awarded 
based on a lottery and instead awards them to foreign graduates of U.S. 
universities with advanced degrees in science, technology, engineering, 
and mathematics. This legislation provides students with the 
opportunity to stay here in America where they can contribute to the 
American economy rather than leaving for other countries, taking their 
venture capital with them to compete against America and her 
businesses.

                              {time}  1600

  I want to thank the gentleman from Texas, Chairman Smith, as well as 
Congressman Henry Cuellar for introducing this legislation. I'd also 
like to note that Congressman Bob Goodlatte of Virginia and Congressman 
Raul Labrador from Idaho have also been instrumental in getting us 
here.
  But there's a reason why we in America are the world's leading 
innovators and have within our borders the world's leading innovators 
and why they choose to launch their companies here. Our Nation offers 
immense opportunities to those who come to our shores.
  My grandparents, just like so many others who immigrated to America, 
knew what foreign students know today: that America has always been a 
place which puts a premium on ensuring that, no matter who you are or 
where you're from, everyone here should have the opportunity to go and 
achieve and earn success.
  According to the Partnership for a New American Economy, 40 percent 
of Fortune 500 companies were founded by immigrants or their children. 
So we must start to take advantage of our status as a destination for 
the world's best and brightest. We must continue to do that. We want 
job creation and innovators to stay here and help us compete.
  Over the past two decades, the number of international graduate 
students enrolled in our Nation's top-notch universities has grown. 
But, as the Congressional Research Service shows, the percentage of 
these students who gain visas has largely remained the same since 1990. 
The STEM Jobs Act says to our foreign graduates, You choose America and 
America chooses you.
  More talent in our workforce will mean more innovation, more start-
ups, more entrepreneurship, more jobs and a better economy. It's time 
our visa system adopted this commonsense advancement. It's time for us 
to pass this bill, Mr. Speaker, and I hope there is a broad bipartisan 
base of support when the vote occurs.
  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to Judy Chu, 
an active member of the Judiciary Committee who, additionally, heads 
the Asian Pacific Caucus.
  Ms. CHU. I rise today in opposition to this bill which will further 
damage our already broken immigration system. I strongly support 
increasing visas for STEM foreign students so they can stay, work, and 
innovate here. But while this bill claims to do that, it actually 
reduces the number of overall visas available and lets unused STEM 
visas disappear by 2014.
  The bill also gets rid of 50,000 legal immigrant visas each year 
under the Diversity Visa Program, which gives every immigrant, no 
matter their background, a chance of immigrating to the United States 
and is so important to immigrants who don't fall into other categories.
  Supporters of legal immigration should not have to kill other 
immigration programs to help our economy maintain its competitive edge. 
This is not a zero-sum game.
  Anyone in support of fair legal immigration should oppose this bill. 
And I urge both sides to come together to work on a bipartisan STEM 
visa bill that will help keep our economy competitive without making 
our backlogged immigration system worse.
  Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman 
from California (Mr. Issa), who is the chairman of the Government 
Oversight Committee.
  Mr. ISSA. Mr. Speaker, for 12 years, my greatest ambition here in 
Congress has been my membership in Judiciary and my activities of 
trying to bring real immigration reform that's a plus to our country.
  My district has two notable areas: one, the agricultural areas that 
so desperately need a guest worker program; the other, throughout San 
Diego and Orange County, the high-tech areas that in many ways rival 
the best in the world, that, in fact, run out of H-1Bs on the day that 
they're offered. So I support the STEM skills reform because it's 
necessary.
  But let me just go through two or three things quickly that are so 
obvious here in this debate.
  One is: People who are detractors from this say, We'd love to have 
it; we simply want an expansion in the total number of immigrants. 
Let's understand, America allows more people to immigrate to our shores 
than the entire rest of the world, combined, does to theirs. We're 
already the most generous, and there has to be a number and that number 
has been set.
  Secondly, it doesn't take away from anyone who has a valid need or 
reason to come here. It's not going to limit reunification. It's not 
going to limit those who have been tortured or in some other way 
affected in their foreign country.
  But I think the most telling one is the CBO, our independent, 
nonpartisan organization that, in fact, has said that making this 
change will save over $1 billion in costs from the dependency that many 
diversity candidates prove to have, in spite of the regulations saying 
they shouldn't.
  And lastly, and the most important one, as an employer of a high-tech 
company, a founder and employer for many years, America has to be like 
every high-tech company. You are always open to hire somebody who will 
make your company grow. America will grow in four jobs or more for each 
person who applies and receives one of

[[Page 14540]]

these visas. That is about getting the economy going again and jobs 
happening again.
  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself as much time as I may 
consume.
  I thank you, because there's only one problem separating the two 
views that have been presented by both sides of the aisle here this 
afternoon. But the proposal of those on the other side, of steamrolling 
through today, simply does not provide for new visas for STEM 
graduates. Instead, it completely eliminates diversity visas, a 
longstanding legal immigration program. And, as surely everyone 
understands on both sides of the aisle, we strongly oppose a zero-sum 
game that trades one legal immigration program for another. I heard 
someone suggest that.
  The elimination of the Diversity Visa Program will drastically 
decrease immigration from African countries. It's as simple as that. In 
recent years, African immigrants have comprised approximately 40 to 50 
percent of the Diversity Visa Program's annual beneficiaries. And so we 
just say simply: That is not fair. There's no point in us having to 
swallow this poison pill. And I can assure you that there's no 
intention that that be done.
  Second, the Diversity Visa Program plays an important foreign policy 
role for the United States. As a former Ambassador testified the year 
before last at a Judiciary Committee hearing:

       The program engenders hope abroad for those that are all 
     too often without it--hope for a better life, hope for 
     reunification with family in the United States, and hope for 
     a chance to use their God-given skills and talent.

  And so I ask my colleague to please consider how we can move the STEM 
issue forward without eliminating the Diversity Visa Program.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman 
from Virginia (Mr. Goodlatte), a senior member of the Judiciary 
Committee and an original cosponsor of this legislation.
  Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Texas, the 
chairman of the committee, for his fine work on this legislation, and I 
rise in support of it.
  You know, this House has twice passed through the entire House 
legislation eliminating the visa lottery program--55,000 visas, not 
given based upon family reunification needs, not given based upon job 
shortages in the United States, but based upon pure luck. And it's 
unfair to people from more than a dozen countries around the world that 
stand in long lines, on waiting lists, and then watch somebody have 
their name drawn out of a computer at random, with no particular job 
skills, no ties in this country, and they get to go right past them 
into a green card in the United States.

                              {time}  1610

  So, if you're from Mexico, you're not eligible for the visa lottery 
program. If you're from Canada, you're not eligible for the visa 
lottery program. If you're from China or India or the Philippines or 
from more than a dozen countries, you are not eligible for this program 
at all.
  Let me just say that far more people with far greater contributions 
to make to our economy, to our system, will benefit from using those 
visas for STEM--for science, for technology, for engineering, and math. 
In fact, most African immigrants to the U.S. do not come through the 
diversity program, and many will benefit from a STEM visa program. 
There are more than 3,000 students from Nigeria alone who are studying 
in STEM fields in the United States. They will be able to stay in the 
U.S. because of the STEM Jobs Act.
  This is a good proposal that is fair to people who want to come to 
this country to better their lives for themselves but to also help the 
United States in these difficult economic times find people who are 
needed here or who have legitimate family reunification needs, not 
simply based on pure luck. Our immigration system is in need of more 
reform than this, but this is great reform, and I urge my colleagues to 
pass this legislation.
  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased now to yield 2 minutes to the 
former chairman of the Education and Labor Committee, the distinguished 
gentleman from California, George Miller.
  Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this partisan bill. It's 
unfortunate. Maintaining this country's advantage in science and 
technology is an important issue, and it should not be a partisan 
issue. Democrats have long supported efforts to increase STEM careers 
in this country and to address the question of STEM visas.
  We all recognize how important these careers are to the future 
economic strength of this country. We could be working together in a 
bipartisan way to address these issues in a fair and thoughtful manner, 
but this bill does not do that. Instead of working together, the 
majority has chosen a partisan route.
  This route puts American workers' wages at risk at a time when they 
can ill afford it. It allows a dangerous race to the bottom that will 
drive wages down for American workers. It allows employers to pay visa 
holders less than the actual wages paid to similarly situated workers 
at those employers. A U.S. worker and a visa holder could be working 
right next to one another, doing the same work, and the foreign worker 
is cheaper. We know what this will mean for U.S. workers' pay and job 
opportunities. Depressing families' wages is not what our country 
needs. That's why I joined with Congresswoman Lofgren on legislation 
that would require a visa holder to be paid at least the actual wage 
being paid to a U.S. worker with similar experience.
  I also have deep concerns that this partisan bill is also a payoff 
for predatory for-profit education institutions. The Republican bill 
includes language that specifically allows for-profit institutions to 
participate in this program. Why is that? Tech and other high-skilled 
employers have not been pushing to get more foreign graduates from for-
profit schools. This provision would allow these institutions to find 
new, potentially lucrative revenue streams for their shareholders 
without regard to the actual needs of the American labor market.
  Mr. Speaker, the American people have made it clear that they are fed 
up with the powerful special interests gaming the system to increase 
their bottom line. They are fed up with partisan exercises meant to 
gain political advantage during an election cycle. It is no surprise 
that for 2 years this Congress had an opportunity to have a full and 
open debate on this very important issue but that the Republicans have 
chosen partisanship, obstruction, and polarization over moving this 
country forward. That's why we see this bill at the last minute, and 
that's why we see this bill requiring a two-thirds vote.
  Mr. SMITH of Texas. Under this bill, the employers have to pay the 
prevailing wage. I don't know from where the gentleman got his 
information.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. 
Griffin), a distinguished and active member of the Judiciary Committee.
  Mr. GRIFFIN of Arkansas. I rise today in support of the STEM Jobs 
Act, and I thank Chairman Smith for his leadership.
  Mr. Speaker, I want to tell you about some job creators in my 
district who would benefit from this bill. Welspun Tubular, which made 
the pipes for the Keystone pipeline, needs advanced STEM graduates to 
train workers. Power Technology needs highly skilled workers to design, 
develop, and manufacture laser products. These companies have struggled 
to find the specific talent they need, and this bill would help them 
create jobs.
  We are currently educating highly skilled Ph.D.'s and masters and are 
sending them back home to compete against us after they graduate. 
That's like Arkansas recruiting the best college football players from 
Texas, training them on our offense and sending them back to Texas to 
compete against us. That doesn't make any sense. Let's fix it. Let's 
pass this bill.

[[Page 14541]]


  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Illinois (Mr. Gutierrez) as few have worked harder on this with Zoe 
Lofgren.
  Mr. GUTIERREZ. Thank you so much.
  It might appear like we are having a debate about whether we should 
send STEM graduates--those with advanced degrees in science, 
technology, engineering, and math--to faraway lands to work for 
companies to compete against us, but this debate is not about that 
because, on the need for STEM visas, there is no debate. The real 
debate we are having today, in creating STEM visas, is whether to shut 
the door to opportunity to others who contribute to the United States 
of America.
  I haven't seen one letter from Google, Yahoo!, Apple, Intel or the 
high-tech industry that says to eliminate 25,000 to 30,000 visas to 
those from Africa and give them to the high-tech industry. I haven't 
seen one letter that says that, and they know that. It's just something 
they want to do, and they want to poison this well with what I think is 
bad policy. Based on the immigrant stories we heard from almost every 
speaker at the Republican and Democratic conventions, I would guess all 
of us here would welcome to the U.S. any decent, hardworking person 
with enough heart and guts to pursue his biggest dreams, but that's not 
what this bill does. I wish it did.
  Imagine if those millions who passed through Ellis Island had been 
given a test when they arrived. If they were gifted in science and 
math, they were in. If they were simply hardworking men or women in 
search of better lives, prepared to sweat and toil in the fields or in 
our factories, they wouldn't have been good enough under this bill. 
Think about it. Where would we all be if we had to pass that test--the 
Pelosis and the Palazzos, the Boehners and the Blumenauers, the 
Schakowskys and the Lipinksis, the Kennedys and the Kuciniches, the 
Romneys and--yes--the Rubios?
  When my parents came from Puerto Rico, they didn't need a visa. They 
just had a sixth-grade education and a ninth-grade education. Under 
this bill, they would say, Not here and not in this America. You're not 
welcome. My mom worked in a factory, and my dad drove a cab, and they 
worked hard every day. They worked hard every day to make this. They 
sent their children to college, and one of them today serves in the 
Congress of the United States.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. LaTourette). The time of the gentleman 
has expired.
  Mr. CONYERS. I yield the gentleman 30 more seconds.
  Mr. GUTIERREZ. They lived the story of America. They came with 
nothing but hopes, and they played by the rules and achieved great 
things, not necessarily for themselves but for their children and now 
their grandchildren.
  Has America benefited? Could we attract the smartest and the 
brightest? Yes. But America is also a better Nation because we attract 
those with the most heart and soul to make something of themselves. 
Let's defeat that bill so we can continue that great American 
tradition.
  Mr. SMITH of Texas. I yield myself 30 seconds.
  Mr. Speaker, no one is hurt more by the diversity visa program than 
unemployed Hispanics and black Americans. The unemployment rate for 
Hispanics with only a high school education is almost 14 percent. The 
unemployment rate for African Americans with only a high school 
education is almost 19 percent. The diversity visa program forces these 
unemployed Americans to compete for very scarce American jobs with 
those other individuals who don't have more than a high school 
education. Why do we want to do this to our own people?
  I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Idaho (Mr. Labrador), an 
original cosponsor of this legislation who is very active on this 
subject.
  Mr. LABRADOR. I rise today in support of the STEM Jobs Act of 2012. 
This bill addresses one of the bipartisan issues we ought to be able to 
solve here in the House of Representatives.
  Both President Obama and Governor Romney have spoken about the need 
to reform our immigration system in order to keep more of the best and 
the brightest minds in America. I am very pleased to have worked with 
Chairman Smith on this bill, and I want to thank him for his 
leadership. I also want to thank Mr. Goodlatte and the majority leader 
for their commitment to bringing this jobs bill to the floor.
  The future of our economy is in the STEM fields. New printers from 
Hewlett-Packard, new semiconductors from Micron, and new phones from 
Apple all rely on retaining the world's best and brightest students and 
on harnessing their ingenuity to create jobs here in America. Even in 
an economic downturn, there aren't enough U.S.-born graduates to meet 
the needs of high-tech employers. Right now, foreign-born students are 
benefiting from our education system and are then going home to compete 
with us.

                              {time}  1620

  This legislation allows us to retain their skills and innovation. We 
know that every American with an advanced STEM degree creates two to 
three new American jobs. We are replacing a broken, inefficient visa 
program with one that works, rewards innovation, and makes jobs for our 
economy.
  Mr. Speaker, I heard the other side talk about this bill all day 
today. This other side controlled the House, the Senate, and the 
Presidency for 2 years and did nothing to improve the immigration 
system. They didn't pass immigration bills, yet the President campaigns 
on the issue of immigration reform. Once again, faced with actually 
passing a bill that improves the immigration system, they're making a 
stand against immigration reform and against economic growth.
  Let me clarify one thing. I have a great deal of respect for 
Congresswoman Lofgren. She and I have talked about this issue for the 
entire 1\1/2\ to 2 years that I've been here in Congress, and I 
recognize that she's been a leader on this issue over the years. I'm 
also an immigration attorney. I've been an immigration attorney for 15 
years. I must clarify that unused diversity visas have never rolled 
over, and to oppose this bill on those grounds is just proof that this 
is more about politics than policy.
  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I would like to gain the previous speaker's 
attention. The House, of which you are a Member, passed the DREAM Act 
216-208, and we enjoyed the support of eight Republican Members.
  Mr. Speaker, I now yield 1\1/2\ minutes to a senior member of the 
Judiciary Committee, Sheila Jackson Lee.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I'm most grateful. Thank you 
very much.
  To the Speaker and to my colleague from Texas, this is the perfect 
infrastructure for collaboration and bipartisanship. We have worked 
together on this issue, and we have confronted the issue that I 
mentioned to Congresswoman Lofgren on which we will continue to work, 
which is to ensure the outreach to Historically Black Colleges and 
Hispanic-serving colleges for the engineers and scientists who are 
prepared to work in America's technology industry, and I expect that 
that will happen. I am supportive of STEM visas to provide for the 
infrastructure of workers for the dynamic technology, Silicon Valley 
software, Austin, Texas, and beyond to be able to be vibrant and 
thriving.
  But as I just left the President of Malawi, a woman who has inspired 
Malawians to look to the future, and as they look to the future, we 
have said that we want to ensure that America has a future with the 
continent. To remove the diversity visas that create diversity, to take 
away opportunities from a continent that, by and large, has been an 
ally and friend to the United States, whose African citizens have come 
to be reunited with families, who have generated outstanding 
businesses, from South Africans, to Kenyans, to Guineans, to those from 
Cote d'Ivoire and those from Nigeria--in my town, Nigerians have 
created the most successful brand of small businesses from being 
seamstresses to doctors and lawyers and others.

[[Page 14542]]

  I cannot vote for a bill that will allow us to remove the component 
for diversity visas as an exchange or substitute for this kind of 
approach. We must have balanced and comprehensive immigration reform.
  Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, let's put our own unemployed 
Hispanics and black Americans first. They should come first.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 45 seconds to the gentleman from California (Mr. 
Bilbray), who is the chairman of the Immigration Reform Caucus.
  Mr. BILBRAY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of this 
piece of legislation.
  All over America, Americans are having to make priority decisions in 
their families. The fact is this Congress needs to make some priority 
decisions. It is not only the right, but the responsibility, of this 
Congress and this Nation to make sure that our immigration policy is 
good for America first and foremost.
  This bill will replace a failed system that actually gambled with 
America's future by having a lottery. It replaces it with bringing good 
scientists in. Let me just give you the numbers from just recently.
  This is going to create 55,000 jobs. Do we want to have 6,000 
Iranians coming here or do you want 6,000 scientists and researchers 
coming in? Do we want to set aside an area where we have over 2,000 
Moroccans being given a set-aside for their country rather than 
treating individuals that have proven that they have an asset that we 
need in this country?
  The real issue here is, Mr. Speaker, whether we are willing to 
correct a mistake of the past to move forward with a fair system that 
judges individuals based on their merit, not based on the country that 
they're coming from.
  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield the gentlelady, Ms. Sheila Jackson 
Lee, 25 seconds.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. If we pass the American Jobs Act, we will 
help Hispanic youngsters, Anglo youngsters, African American 
youngsters, and all Americans.
  However, what an insult to America's values to suggest that those who 
come to this country to give by way of a legal process, diversity 
visas, are not contributing. I do not want to insult anyone who comes 
with the idea of helping America. That means wherever they've come 
from: Africa, Iran, elsewhere.
  If they come for a good reason through the diversity visa to reunite 
with their family, that is the American way. Immigration by law, that 
is the American way.
  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I'm pleased to yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the 
very patient Member from Texas (Mr. Hinojosa).
  Mr. HINOJOSA. Mr. Speaker, I rise to strongly oppose H.R. 6429, the 
Republican STEM proposal before the House today under suspension of the 
rules.
  As the ranking member of the Subcommittee on Higher Education and 
Workforce and vice chair of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, I urge 
my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to join me and members of the 
Congressional Hispanic Caucus, the Congressional Black Caucus, and the 
Asian American Caucus in strongly opposing this Republican STEM 
proposal, misguided legislation that would curtail legal immigration to 
the United States.
  As a proud cosponsor of this bill, I support this legislation because 
it would allow advanced STEM graduates to remain in the United States 
and contribute to our Nation's scientific discovery and technological 
innovation, increasing our Nation's global competitiveness. This bill 
reduces backlogs for STEM degree recipients by attracting and retaining 
critical talent and creating a new EB-6 green card category for persons 
with advanced degrees in STEM from research universities in the United 
States.
  I must underscore that this bill does not eliminate or weaken our 
immigration programs to increase STEM visas. This bill targets only the 
best and the brightest foreign students. Unlike the Republican 
proposal, this legislation, H.R. 6412, does not allow foreign graduates 
of for-profit colleges to receive STEM visas, including degrees earned 
by mail or over the Internet.
  In closing, I urge my colleagues to strengthen our Nation's global 
competitiveness.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise to strongly oppose H.R. 6429, the Republican STEM 
proposal, before the House today under suspension of the rules.
  As Ranking Member of the Subcommittee on Higher Education and 
Workforce Training and Vice Chair of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus 
(CHC), I urge my colleagues, on both sides of the aisle, to join me and 
members of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, the Congressional Black 
Caucus, and the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus in strongly 
opposing the Republican STEM proposal, misguided legislation that would 
curtail legal immigration to the United States.
  Instead, I encourage my colleagues in this chamber to support H.R. 
6412, ``The Attracting the Best and the Brightest Act of 2012'' 
sponsored by Representative Zoe Lofgren.
  As a proud cosponsor of this bill, I support this legislation because 
it would allow advanced STEM graduates to remain in the United States 
and contribute to our Nation's scientific discovery and technological 
innovation, increasing our Nation's global competitiveness.
  This bill reduces backlogs for STEM ``degree recipients by attracting 
and retaining critical talent and creating a new ``EB-6 green card 
category for persons with advanced degrees in science, technology, 
engineering, and mathematics (STEM) from research universities in the 
United States.
  I must underscore that this bill does not eliminate or weaken other 
immigration programs to increase STEM visas. While H.R. 6412 provides 
the same number of STEM visas (50,000) as the Republican proposal, it 
does so without eliminating the long-standing Diversity Visa program, 
which ensures diversity among new immigrants and provides one of the 
few legal pathways to enter the United States.
  This bill targets only the best and the brightest foreign students, 
and requires that these individuals have an advanced degree from an 
accredited public or nonprofit university classified by the National 
Science Foundation as a research institution or as otherwise excelling 
in STEM instruction.
  Unlike the Republican proposal, this legislation H.R. 6412 does not 
allow foreign graduates of ``for-profit colleges'' to receive STEM 
visas, including degrees earned by mail or over the internet.
  H.R. 6412 includes a provision which provides wage protections for 
U.S. workers and requires that the offered wage to the STEM graduate 
meets or exceeds the actual wage paid to U.S. workers with similar 
levels of experience.
  The Republican proposal does not include this provision and does not 
adequately ensure that American workers are protected.
  In closing, I urge my colleagues to strengthen our Nation's global 
competitiveness by opposing the misguided Republican STEM proposal and 
cosponsoring H.R. 6412, ``The Attracting the Best and Brightest Act of 
2012.''
  Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield 45 seconds to the gentleman 
from Arizona (Mr. Flake), who has long been active on the subject of 
immigration.
  Mr. FLAKE. I thank the gentleman for yielding, Mr. Speaker.
  I rise in strong support of the STEM Jobs Act.
  For the past three Congresses, I've worked on this issue with the 
introduction of the STAPLE Act, which would do much the same as this 
bill does, as well as support for other pieces of legislation that do 
what this piece of legislation does, which is allow those who are 
trained in our universities here to contribute to the U.S. economy.
  We all know that it's not government that creates jobs, that the job 
of government is to enable the private sector to create jobs. I can 
think of no better way than to allow the private sector access to the 
brainpower and knowledge of those who have been trained in our 
universities to stay here and help create jobs.
  This is a good piece of legislation. It's one of the few pieces of 
immigration legislation that has bipartisan support. I urge its 
adoption.
  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman 
from California (Mr. Royce), who is also chairman of the Foreign 
Affairs Terrorism Subcommittee.
  Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support the STEM Jobs

[[Page 14543]]

Act. It is time to alter the current immigration system. It is time to 
substantially increase the proportion of new entrants with high levels 
of education and skills.
  Today, we are educating many of the best and brightest from around 
the world, and then, ironically, we're sending them back to work for 
our competitors. This makes no sense.

                              {time}  1630

  Skilled immigrants can contribute to a rising U.S. standard of 
living. They bring capital, they bring ideas, and they produce new 
companies. With this bill, we can help grow innovation, and we can 
create jobs in the U.S. We've got plenty of examples of IT firms in 
California that are founded by immigrants from China and India that 
were educated in our institutions.
  Let's pass this bill and help our economy grow.
  Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield 45 seconds to the gentleman 
from Pennsylvania (Mr. Altmire), who is a member of the Education and 
the Workforce Committee.
  Mr. ALTMIRE. Mr. Speaker, while I would have preferred the Lofgren 
approach, I rise in support of the STEM Jobs Act because it's critical 
to keeping America competitive in the global economy. The United States 
has the best institutions of higher education in the world, 
particularly when it comes to the STEM fields.
  Yet U.S. businesses frequently express concerns over the availability 
of qualified workers to perform jobs that are available and need to be 
filled once we educate and train these students for jobs. We send them 
back to their home countries to compete against us. This simply makes 
no sense.
  By passing this bill, we will help ensure that the best and brightest 
in the world aren't working for our competitors abroad, but that 
America keeps that talent here at home and they play on our team 
instead of competing against us.
  Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman 
from California (Mr. Lungren), who is chairman of the House 
Administration Committee and a senior member of the Judiciary 
Committee.
  Mr. DANIEL E. LUNGREN of California. Mr. Speaker, let's remember 
where we are. Up until 1965, we had a quota system that essentially 
gave advantages to certain countries to get their people in here versus 
others.
  We removed that in 1965. We went to a worldwide quota system based on 
the fact that everyone around the world would have an equal chance to 
get to the United States based on their talents and their reason for 
coming here.
  In about 1981, there was a cry that we weren't getting enough Irish 
coming in here. Tip O'Neill--I recall, I was here on the floor at this 
time--Tip O'Neill and Teddy Kennedy worked together to create the 
Diversity program that allowed anybody to apply for it at 12:01 a.m. 
one morning.
  What do you know, only the Irish knew about it. We got essentially 
Irish in. That worked for a while. Then we changed it so that they and 
others were no longer allowed, and we only allowed certain countries 
in. We're going back to a quota system by country. It doesn't make 
sense. It ought to be a worldwide quota system.
  In addition, I would just say that most African American immigrants 
in the U.S. do not come through the Diversity program. We have many who 
are engaged in the STEM program study here. Just 3,000 from Nigeria 
alone would be able to participate.
  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield the balance of my time to the 
distinguished gentlewoman from California, Ms. Zoe Lofgren.
  Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Mr. Speaker, I think this is a 
disappointing day at a time when we look for leadership on the part of 
the majority to bring us together. Instead, we have a partisan bill 
before us.
  We have 54 cosponsors on the bill that we've introduced. The 
remarkable thing is that we have support across the entire breadth of 
the Democratic Caucus for STEM visas. The things that have been said 
about the Diversity Visa today are simply wrong.
  They remind me of the warnings we got a short while ago about the 
``terror babies'' who would somehow emerge after 21 years. It's absurd.
  We need to vote against this bill, but I think we can quickly 
reconvene and get to the bipartisan effort that this country deserves.
  Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my 
time.
  Mr. Speaker, the STEM Jobs Act spurs economic growth and spurs job 
creation by enabling American employers to hire some of the best and 
brightest foreign students who graduate from American universities. The 
American public, American employers, and the high-tech community all 
support this bipartisan piece of legislation.
  I urge my colleagues to vote for jobs, vote for innovation, and vote 
for economic growth. Let's put the interests of America first.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. MANZULLO. Mr. Speaker, as a proud original co-sponsor of the STEM 
Jobs Act, I urge my colleagues to support this carefully-crafted 
legislation. The American economy faces many challenges today, from 
burdensome regulations to uncertainty over taxes. One of our biggest 
challenges, especially in the manufacturing sector, is the skills gap--
a lack of highly trained workers with the expertise to perform certain 
manufacturing jobs, or a shortage of scientists and engineers to 
develop new technologies. Manufacturing in America relies on innovation 
and skill, but too many factories slow down, too many opportunities are 
missed, and too many jobs are lost because of this skills gap. And 
worse, America's universities train and educate some of the most 
promising scientists and engineers from around the world, but our 
immigration laws force us to send them away to compete against American 
companies.
  It makes no sense to educate foreign students in the fields of 
science, technology, engineering, and mathematics, only to send them 
overseas once they complete their studies. Rather than force these 
innovators and experts to join companies overseas to be in direct 
competition with American high-technology manufacturing firms, we 
should keep innovation and entrepreneurship here at home. The STEM Jobs 
Act will allow these bright minds who study at top American 
universities and are already in this country legally under a student 
visa, the option to stay and work for American companies, build our 
economy, and help create American jobs.
  Mr. Speaker, this bill will not increase the total number of green 
cards offered to immigrants, and it will not allow foreign workers to 
take jobs that Americans are available to do. Instead, the STEM Jobs 
Act makes our immigration laws smarter and guarantees that these green 
cards are available only to fill jobs that Americans can't fill. This 
bill will enhance America's competitiveness in the global marketplace 
and will lead to the economic growth and job creation that American 
workers need.
  Mr. BACA. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to voice my strong opposition to 
H.R. 6429, the misnamed STEM Jobs Act.
  Make no mistake about it, this bill is designed to reduce legal 
immigration to the United States.
  H.R. 6429 doesn't just increase STEM visas, it also eliminates the 
Diversity Visa program--a legal immigration program that makes visas 
available to immigrants from countries that have low rates of 
immigration to the United States.
  It is wrong to force Congress to eliminate one immigration program, 
in an effort to support another.
  This misguided legislation also eliminates rollover provisions for 
unused visas.
  Unfortunately, H.R. 6429 lets unused visas go to waste, and forces 
legal immigrants to continue to suffer in long backlogs.
  In addition, I have serious concerns that this legislation 
automatically allows for-profit and on-line schools to participate in 
the new STEM green card program.
  It's not too late for my Republican colleagues to change course, and 
sit down with Democrats to work on a bipartisan bill that strengthens 
the STEM visa program without limiting legal immigration.
  I urge my colleagues to stand in solidarity and vote ``no'' on this 
attempt to reduce legal immigration.
  Ms. HIRONO. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 6429, the 
misnamed STEM Jobs Act of 2012.
  The ability of our nation to attract the world's best and brightest 
has contributed greatly to the creation of American jobs and the 
success of American businesses large and small. However, many foreign 
students who graduate from our best universities in the science, 
technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) fields become victims of 
a broken visa system. The absence of specific

[[Page 14544]]

visas for graduates in these critical fields has resulted in long wait 
times and forces many to move back home, taking their valuable skills 
out of the American economy. Clearly, the time has come for change.
  Unfortunately, H.R. 6429 isn't the change we need. It follows the 
pattern of the Republicans' approach of giving with one hand while 
taking with the other. This bill would create STEM visas at the expense 
of eliminating the Diversity Visa Program. Diversity visas provide a 
legal path for people from countries with low rates of immigration to 
the United States. Half the recipients are from Africa and almost a 
third are from Asia.
  Democrats and Republicans agree that we should establish a STEM visa 
program, but unfortunately Republicans inserted a poison pill in this 
bill that guarantees it will not pass. It is also clear that the Senate 
will not take up the bill with this provision included.
  We in Hawaii know that diversity is a strength. Hawaii has been 
enriched by the diverse immigrants who call it home, hailing from 
places like the Philippines, Japan, Samoa, Portugal, and around the 
Pacific Rim. While I believe we should be looking for ways to encourage 
the best and brightest to come to our shores and create American jobs, 
we don't need to do it at the expense of the Diversity Visa Program.
  As an immigrant, I know the promise America offers and the hopes of 
those who come to our shores seeking a better life. That's why I 
support efforts to improve our immigration system and encourage those 
with needed skills to come and work for our businesses. Furthermore, a 
strong economic foundation depends on a world class American education 
system that prepares the young people of our country to compete in the 
STEM fields. I am convinced we can find a way to come together to 
create a fair STEM Visa Program and to strengthen our STEM education so 
more Americans can get these jobs.
  H.R. 6429 is a flawed bill, and I urge my colleagues to oppose it.
  Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 6429, an 
unnecessarily partisan bill to increase the number of visas for foreign 
students graduating with advanced degrees in science, technology, 
engineering, and mathematics (STEM). While I strongly believe we should 
increase the number of visas for these students, I oppose this bill 
because it eliminates the Diversity Visa Program. There is broad 
bipartisan support to increase the number of STEM visas. It is 
unfortunate that the Republican Leadership brought this bill to the 
floor. President Obama highlighted his support for increasing the 
number of STEM visas in his 2012 State of the Union Address, when he 
stated that it made no sense to train foreign students with advanced 
STEM degrees and then ``send them home to invent new products and 
create new jobs somewhere else.'' I wish the Republican Leadership 
would have brought to the floor a bill introduced by Rep. Zoe Lofgren 
to increase the number of STEM visas without eliminating the Diversity 
Visas Program. I support that legislation.
  Ms. ESHOO. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 6429, the STEM 
Jobs Act.
  Our Nation should be first in the world in science, technology, 
engineering and math. I'm pleased that we are in agreement on the 
urgency of this goal. However, this legislation has two big problems 
which are highly detrimental to our mutual goal.
  The first problem is that this legislation takes unnecessary, unfair 
steps to reduce legal immigration, such as cutting the Diversity 
Program. The Diversity Program is one of the few existing pathways for 
African applicants to enter our Nation legally. Cutting this program 
will not enhance our Nation's STEM competitiveness.
  The second problem is that this legislation allows American employers 
to pay inferior wages to foreign STEM graduates--forcing American 
workers to compete on an unlevel playing field.
  We can do better than the STEM Jobs Act.
  Representative Lofgren's legislation, the Attracting the Best and 
Brightest Act, ensures that students who earn advanced STEM degrees in 
America stay in America and contribute to our Nation's prosperity. It 
creates a new visa category for applicants with advanced STEM degrees, 
and importantly, takes steps to protect the wages of Americans--a 
consideration which absolutely must be taken into account.
  The Attracting the Best and Brightest Act does not contain the 
harmful immigration provisions of the STEM Jobs Act. Rather, it 
represents a commonsense solution to a very real problem.
  I am pleased that Republicans, Democrats, and the Administration all 
agree we should do more to ensure that our Nation benefits from the 
talents, skills, and ideas of our advanced STEM graduates. However, the 
STEM Jobs Act legislation takes the wrong approach, and I regrettably 
urge my colleagues to oppose it.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Smith) that the House suspend the rules and 
pass the bill, H.R. 6429.
  The question was taken.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds 
being in the affirmative, the ayes have it.
  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further 
proceedings on this question will be postponed.

                          ____________________