One of the many outrages in the tax bill passed by the House of Representatives on November 16 is the elimination or reduction of tax breaks for many college and graduate school students. Probably the most drastic measure is one that could affect approximately 145,000 grad students now working as low-paid research or teaching assistants. These students might see their federal tax payments rise to as much as $10,000 a year, enough to force many of them to drop out of school. About 60 percent of the students are in the fields known collectively as STEM — science, technology, engineering and math.
What is especially striking about this measure is that the same Republican politicians that pushed it through the House claim they want to “make America great again.” But the strength of the US economy in the past has depended largely on its leadership in science and technology (although that position has been slipping in recent years). So why would the House Republicans want to shuffle thousands of potential US scientists and technology workers into less stable jobs?
The answer may lie in an immigration reform bill that President Trump endorsed in August.
The misleadingly named RAISE (Reforming American Immigration for Strong Employment) Act, introduced by Republican Senators Tom Cotton of Arkansas and David Perdue of Georgia, would reduce legally permitted immigration by half, from about 1 million people a year to some 500,000. Most of the cuts would come out of family reunification visas, which under the bill would only go to spouses and minor children of US citizens and legal permanent residents. Naturalized citizens, for example, would no longer be able to bring their ailing parents to live with them permanently. The RAISE Act would also limit the number of refugees admitted each year to 50,000; previously the president could set higher caps on the admissions, allowing tens of thousands of victims of war and persecution to start their lives over in the United States.
However, the bill would keep the current annual limit of 140,000 for employer-sponsored green cards. The main change for this category would be a systematization of the standards for admission — giving priority, for instance, to younger applicants with proficiency in English and advanced degrees in STEM fields. The bill would also eliminate per-country caps, opening the way for more immigrants from countries with well-developed science and technology sectors, such as China, India and South Korea.
The bill is unlikely to become a law any time soon, but it gives us a sense of the Republicans’ thinking. Recent immigrants already tend to be highly educated; 48 percent of immigrants arriving here from 2011 to 2015 had college degrees, compared to 31 percent of US-born adults. The RAISE Act would bring in a still greater proportion of college graduates while favoring younger immigrants with a background in science and technology. In other words, people who match the profile of the students driven out of careers in science and technology by the House tax bill. Are the Republicans seeing these immigrants as replacements for US-born STEM workers?
Of course this seems to contradict the politicians’ often expressed concern for “middle-class Americans,” but it makes a lot of sense from the point of view of corporate America. After all, producing a homegrown physicist or software engineer requires a considerable investment of resources; immigrant STEM workers come with an education that was largely provided by their countries of origin, often at public expense.
And there’s another advantage. By luring these educated young people here, the United States deprives their home countries of the immigrants’ skills and talents, producing a “brain drain” that weakens the potential of a nation like China to offer economic competition to US companies. And this approach isn’t that far from mainstream thinking in our political class. For example, Darrell M. West, a vice president at the very centrist Brookings Institution, promotes what he calls “the ‘brain gain’ of immigration.” “To stay competitive,” he advises us, “the United States must institute more of an open-door policy to attract unique talents from other nations.”
The US should welcome immigrants, educated or not, simply as fellow human beings, but that’s not what US policymakers are saying. Both Darrell West and the Republican politicians only seem to value immigrants when they can help bolster the US economy. What distinguishes the Republicans is that they couple the “brain gain” policy with anti-immigrant rhetoric and attacks on refugees and family unification, shamelessly claiming that they’re “putting Americans first.” The tax bill is a reminder that the only ones they put first are their billionaire friends and donors.
We’re not backing down in the face of Trump’s threats.
As Donald Trump is inaugurated a second time, independent media organizations are faced with urgent mandates: Tell the truth more loudly than ever before. Do that work even as our standard modes of distribution (such as social media platforms) are being manipulated and curtailed by forces of fascist repression and ruthless capitalism. Do that work even as journalism and journalists face targeted attacks, including from the government itself. And do that work in community, never forgetting that we’re not shouting into a faceless void – we’re reaching out to real people amid a life-threatening political climate.
Our task is formidable, and it requires us to ground ourselves in our principles, remind ourselves of our utility, dig in and commit.
As a dizzying number of corporate news organizations – either through need or greed – rush to implement new ways to further monetize their content, and others acquiesce to Trump’s wishes, now is a time for movement media-makers to double down on community-first models.
At Truthout, we are reaffirming our commitments on this front: We won’t run ads or have a paywall because we believe that everyone should have access to information, and that access should exist without barriers and free of distractions from craven corporate interests. We recognize the implications for democracy when information-seekers click a link only to find the article trapped behind a paywall or buried on a page with dozens of invasive ads. The laws of capitalism dictate an unending increase in monetization, and much of the media simply follows those laws. Truthout and many of our peers are dedicating ourselves to following other paths – a commitment which feels vital in a moment when corporations are evermore overtly embedded in government.
Over 80 percent of Truthout‘s funding comes from small individual donations from our community of readers, and the remaining 20 percent comes from a handful of social justice-oriented foundations. Over a third of our total budget is supported by recurring monthly donors, many of whom give because they want to help us keep Truthout barrier-free for everyone.
You can help by giving today. Whether you can make a small monthly donation or a larger gift, Truthout only works with your support.