Startups Speak: We Won't Be Hiring in the U.S.

Sumit Suman is the co-founder of Mentii, an online mentoring platform connecting successful mentors with aspiring young people. Sumit started the business both in New York and Bangalore in order to benefit from capital, talent and the market across two startup hubs. But, as the co-founder of Mentii, it was imperative that Sumit could work on the U.S. side. This is where the trouble began.

The whole visa process was an expensive distraction, especially during the early bootstrapped stage when the team needed to devote all their resources to finding and proving the market. After receiving a protracted Request For Evidence (RFE), where responding to it would have resulted in further legal expenses, Sumit had no choice but to withdraw his visa application. This is despite the fact that Mentii had already invested 40 percent of their total expenditure on immigration-related costs!

Now back in India, Sumit explains that his decision was the only option for his business; even if there was a legal (though uncertain) way to stay in the U.S. in order to grow the company, the cost of doing so was too prohibitive. While the Mentii team will still find a way to engage the U.S. market, and U.S. investors, the team will not be growing here -- in other words, no additional jobs will be created in America.

Startups Speak: Sumit Suman

from Engine Advocacy on Vimeo.

If you have an immigration story to tell, email editorial@engine.is

Engine to Senate Judiciary: Pass Immigration Reform Now

Engine endorses the Senate “Gang of 8” proposal on comprehensive immigration reform. So, on behalf of more than 500 startup members and other startup companies across the U.S., we sent a letter of support to Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-VT), Ranking Member Charles Grassley (R-IA) and the members of the Senate Judiciary Committee.

We thought it prudent at this juncture to thank the Senators who have been working hard on this proposal. Going forward, we hope their good work will be the subject of robust debate and then we’ll look towards the swift passage of this bill as we march towards solving our nation’s broken immigration system.

The Judiciary Committee is the first stop on the bill’s journey to hopefully becoming law. The markup process that begins today will amend and refine the legislation into a bill that can pass in the Senate, and one that can also do real and permanent good for people and businesses across the country who are in need of a working immigration system.

As we’ve said before, you can take action as well by committing to remain a vocal participant in this process. You can sign up for the March for Innovation which is now only 11 days away. It is only with your voice that we’ll be able to make a difference on this issue, so sign up, get involved and let your voice be heard today.

Here’s the full text of the letter:

Dear Chairman Leahy and Ranking Member Grassley and members of the Committee,

I’m writing to you, on behalf of the startup community, in support of S. 744 -- the recent Comprehensive Immigration Reform proposal released by your Senate colleagues. Engine Advocacy represents more than 500 startup companies from all across the United States, and we believe the provisions in this bill would greatly benefit the startup community, and therefore the U.S economy as a whole.

New and young firms are responsible for all new net job growth since 1980, according to research from the Kauffman Foundation. In addition, our own Tech Works research projected that for every job created in the high-tech sector, 4.3 additional jobs will be created in the local goods and services economy, including barbers, lawyers, and health care professionals. Finally, with forty percent of Fortune 500 companies founded by immigrants, or the children of immigrants, it’s critically important that we safeguard the ability of the next generation of founders to start business here.

The proposed INVEST visa will directly benefit immigrant founders and entrepreneurs who want to start a business here, and already have the support of local venture capitalists. In addition, raising the H-1B visa cap, and expanding the green card system with merit-based visas for high-skilled immigrants, will also make it easier for startups to employ much needed workers. Taking into account recent developments, we also support Senator Hatch’s amendment to make the H-1B visa cap responsive to market demand.

We applaud the work already done by your Senatorial colleagues and look forward to a spirited debate, a robust amendments process, and the opportunity to be a resource for the committee and the Senate at large as the debate advances. In the end, the continued good work of this committee and of Congress can affect real and permanent good for our country -- helping to catalyze continued economic growth in our community, and opportunity for the country as a whole. Startups can power the next generation of growth in the American economy if we let them.

We hope that you will support this proposal that will lay the foundations for a prosperous future.

With thanks,

Michael McGeary
Co-Founder
Engine Advocacy

Photo courtesy of Talk Radio News Service.

Startups Speak: Immigration and the Innovation Economy

This post is by Fabien Beckers, Co-Founder at Morpheus Medical.

I am a foreign-born entrepreneur in America. My company, Morpheus Medical, has created the first cardiac diagnostic tool that provides 3D interactivity, flow and pressure inside the heart. And all it takes is a ten minute MRI exam. But since I am a French citizen, I faced deportation, and the possibility of losing the chance to build this life-saving company. Understanding the importance of immigration reform is understanding what innovators, of any nationality, are capable of achieving.

Heart-related diseases account for more than a third of all U.S. deaths, and in 2010, the total cost was estimated at around $444 billion; treatment of these diseases accounts for about $1 of every $6 spent on health care in this country. These numbers are second only to oncology -- the diagnosis and treatment of cancer.

Responding to the current lack of accuracy in diagnosis, our technology not only solves the problem, it also reduces the time required by doctors, and therefore lowers the cost. In addition, the non-invasive aspect makes our solution perfectly suited to diagnosing small children with heart defects and diseases.

After studying for my PhD at Cambridge in the UK, I came to the United States in 2010 to attend Stanford’s Graduate School of Business where I certainly benefited from the best education this country has to offer. But when I graduated and wanted to start a business of my own, I faced an additional challenge as a result of my nationality.

Founding a business is already a very challenging and chaotic process. When finding partners, investors and customers is just the beginning, immigration battles present another, totally unnecessary, hurdle.

At Morpheus, we were lucky enough to pique investor interest early, but unfortunately, the investment was conditional upon securing my immigration status. When my H-1B application was denied, my appeal failed, and other avenues were successively closed off, the survival of this company came down to one person in one office in California who thankfully put a stamp on my O1 application.

This is not how the system should work.

No company, community, or country can survive without talent. So we should be helping brilliant innovators who want to build companies that will change lives, here in America. Everyone I’ve spoken to -- Republicans and Democrats -- agrees that this issue needs attention. Now is the chance to act; this bill needs our support. A quarter of all tech startups have an immigrant founder. I think I speak for many of these founders when I say that I want to stay here and build a successful company that creates jobs. We need an immigration system that supports the American innovation economy.

If you have an immigration story to tell email editorial@engine.is.

It’s All Relative: STEM Workers are in High Demand

Recent claims of an excess supply of high-skilled workers in the STEM occupations of science, technology, engineering and math are at odds with anecdotal and empirical evidence. While it’s difficult to definitively conclude whether or not there is a shortage of workers in any field, publicly available government data and common sense reject the notion that there are “too many” high-tech workers in the United States. More importantly, this entire discussion misses a larger point—high-skilled employment isn’t a zero sum game where a fixed set of workers are competing for a fixed set of jobs in an economy free from global competition. Let’s separate fact from fiction as we move forward with immigration reform.

Background

As the immigration reform debate heats up, so too has the rhetoric. One issue that has generally received broad support is the idea of expanding visas for high-skilled foreign workers—in particular those in the STEM fields of science, technology, engineering and math. Such support is based on the view that there aren’t enough qualified native-born American workers to fill demand for these roles. It also comes from the acknowledgment that employment in these fields is critical to economic growth, making them a national priority.

Despite this, some critics have voiced concerns about expanding visas for STEM workers, arguing not only that there isn’t a shortage of STEM workers, but in fact there are too many of them. Expanding high-skilled work visas, they claim, would push native-born American workers out of key technological occupations and reduce the wages of those who remain in them. Such claims are certainly outside the mainstream, but they have been taken seriously enough to appear recently in the Op-Ed page of the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Wall Street Journal, and most recently, the Atlantic.

So, which is it? Are there too few or too many STEM workers in the United States? It can’t be both. Since the truth has important implications for thousands of workers, startups, and the economy, we had better get it right.

The “we have too many high-tech workers” hypothesis is flawed because it is informed by an incomplete set of information. It also lacks common sense. The aforementioned articles rely upon a November report and a report published last week by the same think-tank, both of which point to tepid inflation-adjusted wage growth in computer and math sciences (CMS) fields—a subset of STEM—as definitive evidence of an abundance of labor supply in those professions.

The fact that inflation-adjusted wages grew slowly during the last decade lacks important context. Quite obviously, there were two economic recessions during this period—one of which was the worst contraction since the Great Depression. Both were followed by “jobless recoveries,” or prolonged periods of low employment growth after the economy has begun to grow again.

At minimum, a more relevant question is: how did wages in the CMS fields, and by extension STEM, grow relative to other professions? Looking at just one side of the story is the intellectual equivalent of concluding that the Cincinnati Reds lost last night because they only scored 2 runs. They actually won, because the team they played, the St. Louis Cardinals, scored just 1 run. Context matters.

A more complete and responsible analysis would look at relative performance as well as a broader set of measures to determine labor market “tightness”—a term that applies to areas where potential shortages may exist. A tight labor market would have some or all of these qualities relative to others: rapid employment and wage growth, low unemployment, and a high prevalence of job vacancies.

One final note before we get started: because this debate is taking place in the context of immigration reform for high-skilled workers, whenever possible the data here will be restricted to workers with at least a bachelor’s degree.

Wage Growth

Economic theory says that if shortages existed, prices (wages) would adjust upward until supply (workers) met demand (employers). But the reality is much more complicated. For example, wages adjust slowly and workers must learn new skills—especially for technical roles like in STEM. Still, it’s an important measure for assessing labor market tightness.

The chart below shows how the inflation-adjusted median wage has changed since January 2000 through 2012, for three groups of workers—those in the STEM occupations, those in the CMS subset of STEM, and those in all occupations outside of STEM.

Real Median Wage Change, Bachelor’s Degree Holders (2000-2012)

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Survey; Bureau of Labor Statistics, CPI; Engine calculations. Note: Data have been smoothed using a 12-month moving-average

The median wage in STEM and CMS occupations grew by an inflation-adjusted 3.5 percent and 4.0 percent respectively. That amounts to average annual growth rates of around one-third of a percent. Ouch.

But let’s take look at this in context: it’s been a very rough twelve years. As I mentioned before, there were two recessions—one of them the worst economic contraction since the Great Depression—followed by two jobless recoveries. The fact that there was wage growth at all during this period might actually be impressive.

Compared with workers in other fields, wage growth for STEM and CMS workers was actually quite robust. The inflation-adjusted median wage for all occupations outside of STEM fell by 5.5 percent during the same period, for a decline of half a percent each year on average.

Employment and Unemployment

Beyond wage growth, there are a few other measures to consider when analyzing labor market tightness—here we look at employment growth and the unemployment rate before turning to job vacancies afterward.

Employment Change, Bachelor’s Degree Holders (2000-2012)

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, CPS; Engine calculations. Note: Data have been smoothed using a 12-month moving-average

This chart shows employment growth since January 2000 for college-educated workers in the STEM, CMS and non-STEM categories. Employment in the non-STEM occupations increased 31.3 percent, for an average annual gain of 2.3 percent. STEM fields performed even better, growing 41.6 percent or 2.9 percent per year on average—that’s about one-third more growth than non-STEM. The CMS subset blew the others away—more than doubling non-STEM growth as it increased by 83.1 percent or 5.2 percent annually on average.

Unemployment Rate, Bachelor’s Degree Holders (2000-2012)

 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, CPS; Engine calculations. Note: Data have been smoothed using a 12-month moving-average

This chart shows the unemployment rate for each of our occupational groups during the same time period. The unemployment rate shows the number of people without a job, but who are willing and able to work, and are actively looking for a job (the unemployed), as a share of the total labor force (the unemployed plus the employed). In this case, the occupation assigned to an unemployed person would be the one they held in their last position.

As the chart shows, unemployment rates for college-educated workers of all varieties have been quite low over the last twelve years. The rate for STEM, and especially CMS workers, spiked during the dot-com boom—highlighting the job losses that occurred in that segment of the economy. Important to note, however, is that after peaking unemployment in STEM and CMS fell sharply. This indicates the ease with which unemployed workers in those fields were able to find new work—highlighting their relative value to employers.

The three rates peaked at about the same level during the Great Recession, though STEM and CMS unemployment has fallen sharply since mid-2010; declining by about 2.5 and 2.0 percentage points respectively during that two-year period. Unemployment for workers outside of STEM has only declined by about half a percentage point during the same period. Overall, the evidence here is more mixed: STEM workers seem to face higher volatility while unemployment for non-STEM workers rises less during recessions but also falls slower in recoveries. Even so, the STEM rate has fallen sharply in the last year.

Job Vacancies

Perhaps the most important measure for assessing labor market tightness is the ability of employers to fill open positions. If labor shortages exist, it would be difficult to fill open positions—openings would remain vacant for extended periods or discouraged employers may not even bother posting them at all. Since the reasons for not filling a job are complex, and even if they weren’t, data are elusive, the next best option is to compare the number of open positions with the number of workers available to fill them.

Here, we look at two ways of presenting that data. One caveat first—the job vacancy data used here aren’t available by level of educational attainment. Therefore, we are unable to restrict this portion of the analysis to workers with a bachelor’s degree or more. As a result, the differences here between STEM, CMS and non-STEM may be somewhat overstated.

Number of Unemployed per Job Opening (2005-2012)

 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, CPS; Conference Board, HWOL; Bureau of Labor Statistics, JOLTS; Engine calculations

In a market with an abundance of available labor, the ratio of unemployed per job opening would be high—a large number of workers would be competing with one another for a smaller number of jobs. Where the labor market is tight, this number would be low—in other words demand is outstripping available supply. While the reality is more complicated, this is still a very good way to estimate the relationship between demand and supply.

As the data make clear, the market in STEM and CMS fields is much, much tighter than for fields outside of STEM. At the end of 2012, there were 2.4 CMS job openings for each unemployed CMS worker and 1.4 STEM openings for each unemployed STEM worker. That’s a lot of job openings for each unemployed worker to potentially be matched with. The exact opposite was true in non-STEM fields, where 4 unemployed workers battled for each job opening.

Job Vacancy Rate (2005-2012)

 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, CPS; Conference Board, HWOL; Bureau of Labor Statistics, JOLTS; Engine calculations

If you’re unconvinced that unemployed workers are an adequate measure of available labor, we can extend that definition to include workers who are currently employed in those roles. Recall that the unemployed plus the employed constitute the labor force. Here, we use the labor force as a measure of labor availability for STEM, CMS and non-STEM workers.

This time, the number of job openings is in the numerator and is expressed as a share of the labor force. This is often referred to as the job vacancy rate. Here, a bigger number would indicate a tighter labor market, showing that there are a larger number of job openings relative to the ability of the labor force to fill them. A smaller job vacancy rate would indicate the opposite.

We still see a similar story, though less pronounced: there is a larger number of job openings relative to available labor to fill those roles in STEM and CMS, compared with fields outside of STEM. The difference between this chart and the prior one likely has to do with a more rapidly declining unemployment rate and higher employment growth in STEM and CMS—both positive signs.

Conclusion

Wage growth for STEM and CMS workers with at least a bachelor’s degree has been more robust during the last twelve years than it has been for workers outside of these fields. Not only did wages grow at the median for these fields while wages in all other professions fell substantially, that growth also reached workers with a broader set of income levels.

Looking at other measures, available labor to meet job openings has been scarcer for the STEM and CMS fields, employment growth has been more robust, and unemployment has fallen to lower levels. The evidence is more mixed when it comes to unemployment, but overall the consistency across measures and the magnitude of differences point to tighter labor markets in these fields.

In fact, according to performance thresholds to assess labor market tightness outlined in a comprehensive review of the literature published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the CMS labor market is tight on each of three metrics (employment, wages, and unemployment). STEM is tight on two of three (wages and unemployment) and goes halfway on the third (employment). The BLS report doesn’t provide threshold criteria for job vacancies because these data weren’t available at that time.

This highlights a few important points worth making. Firstly, providing definitive evidence of the existence or nonexistence of a labor shortage in any profession is difficult, both because what constitutes a shortage can be broad based and because the appropriate data can be elusive. It’s irresponsible for researchers to claim there is an oversupply of STEM workers because of one metric taken outside of its proper context.

To be clear, the approach here does not claim that there is a shortage of workers in STEM and CMS fields. Instead, it shows that these labor markets are tighter than others based on a broad set of measures. At minimum, it is a clear rejection of the notion that we have too many high-tech workers in the United States—an argument that not only fails on evidence, but common sense as well.

Secondly, and perhaps most importantly, the argument about whether there is or is not a true shortage of STEM workers misses the entire point. Recent research has shown that foreign-born STEM workers increase employment and wage opportunities for high-skilled native-born American workers (STEM and non-STEM). In other words, these workers are complementary to, not substitutes for, one another. Foreign-born STEM workers are important contributors to productivity gains, which fuel economic growth and national prosperity. And because these workers tend to be employed in sectors of the economy that compete globally, if the United States doesn’t capture the talent and therefore growth, someone else will.

Let’s get our facts straight, and in context, as we move forward with immigration reform. Sure, foreign worker programs like the H-1B visa have a number of problems and need rethinking. So does our education system. But let’s fix those, not shut our doors to high-skilled foreign workers based on poor economics. That would be throwing the baby out with the bathwater, and in the process, shooting ourselves in the foot.

Ian Hathaway is the research director at Engine.

Startups Speak: Let Me Grow My Business

Sacha Tueni, co-founder of Changemakrs, grew up in Austria. When he moved to the United States to work with Facebook’s mobile partnership team in 2009, he was granted a visa within 3 short months. As a result, when Sacha decided to start his own business, he had no sense of how complicated the immigration process could actually be for a small company with limited resources. Now Sacha spends a third of his time talking to his lawyer, instead of growing his business.

Startups Speak: Sacha Tueni from Engine Advocacy on Vimeo.

If you have an immigration story to tell, email editorial@engine.is.

After the Gang of Eight

Last Wednesday, the Senate’s so-called “Gang of 8” released their proposal to fix our nation’s immigration system. The 844-page bill, (which you can read here you speak legal), aims to rebuild a system which has become overloaded, burdensome and anti-competitive in a global context. The nuanced proposal covers multiple sectors of our economy, and different skill levels of potential immigrants.

For our community, there are many encouraging signs which we’ve written about in our full policy update. The inclusion of provisions like a startup visa, merit-based visas, and an increase in H-1B visas provide for more and better pathways for immigrant entrepreneurs to build business in America.

So, ok, great! Job well done everyone. Glad we fixed that. Is it time to move on?

Not even remotely.

From at least one conversation I had at the end of last week with a tired Senate staffer, I can report that “now is the time for the real work to begin.” This comes from an individual who has been working on immigration legislation with other Senate offices for the last four years.

The next step for the bill is to wind through the sometimes-rocky committee and amendment processes in the Senate. We also expect, in fairly short order, to see a companion piece of legislation from a similarly tasked group of House members. Then, the pundits, interest groups, and others will weigh in on what they see.

If the Senate bill passes in both chambers, it can be sent for the President’s signature to become law. If the Senate and House proposals pass through both chambers, the bills must then be conflated before reaching the President’s desk. In the worst case scenario, neither bill passes both houses and we start again from the beginning.

Now more than ever, it is critically important for you to keep the pressure on Congress to make sure the immigration debate and reform legislation continues to advance -- we need to ensure that the positive provisions for our startup community are represented in the final bill. We can do this by reminding members of Congress that building an immigration system that works, and can scale, is of critical importance to our ability to remain competitive in a global marketplace. We started by telling the House Small Business Committee just how important startups are to the U.S. economy.

Right now, the best way to take action is to join with our friends at March for Innovation. There, you’ll find resources, ways to get active, and can sign up for the Thunderclap in anticipation of the upcoming virtual march on Washington. We’ll be making more resources available in the coming weeks and months as this process continues.

To ensure we reach the eventual goal of rebuilding a broken immigration system, we as a startup community need to continue our active engagement in this process as it unfolds. Our voices will be critically important, and our work is underway. Engine, and all of its resources, stand at the ready to help reach our goal.

If you have an immigration story to tell, email editorial@engine.is

Startups Speak: Reward Individuals Who Have Contributed

Michael Ang (or Mang as he is better known) is an engineer from Canada. He works for Changemakrs here in San Francisco. In fact, Michael has been working in the United States for over fifteen years -- mostly within the startup community. He was the first employee of Xoom -- a company that is now post IPO and employs hundreds of Americans. Despite Michael’s experience, his masters degree from NYU, and his contribution to the startup community -- and the U.S. economy as a whole, he has only ever been granted a succession of temporary visas. Watch Michael tell his story, and tell us what he’s most excited about in the new immigration bill.

Startups Speak: Michael Ang from Engine Advocacy on Vimeo.

 If you have an immigration story to tell, email editorial@engine.is.

How the Gang of Eight Immigration Bill Impacts Startups

After months of waiting, the bipartisan Gang of Eight Senators released an immigration reform bill (full 844 pages here!) The plan we’re seeing today is not only the first real attempt at truly comprehensive immigration reform -- it might also have a shot. The eight Senators included provisions for high-skilled labor that are a testament to the powerful role the tech community has played coming together strongly on this issue.

Despite some areas for improvement, this plan is something the technology community can, and should, rally behind. The new Invest Visa (better known by the community as a Startup Visa) will really encourage smart individuals to start businesses in the United States. In addition, provisions making it easier for students to apply for green cards will encourage the best and the brightest to come to school here and stay, and relieve the pressure on the H-1B system. This bill is also planning for the next generation of innovators with much-needed investments in our own education system.

First Look Key Takeaways:

1. Starting a business is lot easier for foreign founders with two types of Startup Visa

2. Hiring Foreign Talent

• H-1B reform will increase the number of visas available
• Increases in wage requirements do not take into account equity or other benefits, and require startups to pay median wages determined by metro area. This might make it difficult for smaller companies to compete with larger companies -- with deeper pockets -- for top talent.
• More green cards for startup workers through plans to reduce the backlog, and institute new categories: a larger skilled workers employment-based category, and a merit-based category.
• New merit visa includes provisions for entrepreneurs and individuals in high-demand jobs.

Here are the details:

1. Foreign startup founders get a Startup Visa

Currently, there is no visa class for foreign individuals who want to stay in the United States to start a company. This proposal makes it easier by creating an Invest (Investing in New Venture, Entrepreneurial Startups and Technologies) Visa with two categories -- the first is a temporary visa, the second grants permanent residency. Both categories establish reasonable criteria for startup founders as they work to establish their business in this country.

The startup community knows this better as the startup visa. With reasonable requirements and options for renewal, this is a big step in the right direction. Moreover, it gives lifelines to founders whose first venture might have failed. If further investment is forthcoming, the individual can start again. According to the definition for entrepreneur in this section, up to three individuals of the founding team can use this visa.

a) Non-immigration Invest Visa

• 3 year temporary visa

• No numerical caps, or limits to the number of times an individual can renew.

• To qualify, individuals must show $100,000 in investment from an accredited investor, venture capitalist, or government entity.

• Or if the company already exists, the founder needs to prove that they have created at least three jobs and have an annual revenue of at least $250,000.

• For a full 3 year renewal, the company must employ 3 people with annual revenue of $200,000 for two years, or $250,000 of additional investment.

• For 1 year renewals, the founder must show that the company has made progress towards reaching these requirements.

b) Immigrant Invest Visa

• Grants permanent residency to successful entrepreneurs
• Capped at 10,000 annually
• To qualify, individuals must have maintained a valid nonimmigrant status for at least 2 years, and have created 5 or more jobs in the United States. In addition, the entrepreneur must also have either secured at least $500,000 investment or generated at least $750,000 in annual revenue during the previous 2 years.
• For entrepreneurs with a STEM masters or PhD, the requirement to have maintained a valid nonimmigrant status for at least 2 years is the same, and the other requirements are 4 jobs and $500,000 investment, or 3 jobs and $500,0000 annual revenue.

The revenue and employment requirements should allow most successful startup founders to switch to this permanent visa category. For serial entrepreneurs, however, the time it takes to acquire this visa might be cumbersome. In addition, a founder might not be able to sell a successful venture, or start another, while waiting for visa approval.

2. Hiring Foreign Born Talent

Hiring the right individuals is crucial for startups to grow. Through H-1B reform, changes to the green card allocation system, and new merit-based visas, this bill offers a few changes to the current system that will encourage foreign born talent to remain in the country after completing their studies, slowing the brain drain. But, it might make attracting new talent from abroad comparatively more difficult.

a) Expanding the H-1B

• H-1B visa cap raised from 65,000 to 110,000, with an adjustable cap that can go as high as as high as 180,000 based on the High Skills Jobs Demand Index formula.
• This formula uses the number of visa petitions filed and the unemployment rate in the related occupations category of Bureau of Labor Statistics data from the previous year.

The cap increases are necessary, especially after the 124,000 H-1B applications and resulting visa lottery this year. But this is where the bill falls a little short. Since the cap can only be raised by 10,000 annually, H-1B supply might still be unable respond to the demand. We advocate for an H-IB visa cap that is responsive to the needs of the market.

Higher wage requirements for H-1B recipients

• Previously, employers have been required to pay the prevailing wage for the job.
• This bill changes the method of calculating that wage, identifying it by metro area.
• The range for each metro area would be further divided into tiers -- high, average, and low. H-1B employers will be now required to pay at the “average” level.

Despite trying to counter the perceived abuse of wage depression of H-1B system, the change in wage requirements is where this bill could do more harm than good for startups. Though this is not as steep as expected, and we haven’t seen these wage ranges for startup cities, we’re still concerned that this tenet of the bill will make H-1B hires unaffordable for startups, in comparison to larger companies with bigger budgets. Startups, generally clustered in large metro areas, think San Francisco and New York, with already inflated incomes across a large range, may simply not have enough funding to meet the prevailing wage requirement. This provision also does not account for equity or other benefits, so startups with limited budget for payroll might be able to attract talent, but unable to afford it under these new rules.

Reducing the burden on H1-B

• Up to 25,000 advanced degree holders in STEM fields are exempt from the H-1B cap.
• Students on F-1 visas, earning a bachelors degree or above, will be allowed dual intent, i.e. students with lawful status are also permitted to apply for green cards if employment is secured while still at school, and their potential employers can apply an employment-based visa category (see below).

b) More green cards for startup workers

• Per country caps removed
• Deals with backlog of family and employment based visas by making unused visas available, in addition to using the visas allocated for the new merit based system.
• New definition of family to include spouses and children, exempting them from the employment-based visa cap.
• Priority workers (including developers, without advanced graduate degrees) and advanced degree holders will both be allocated 40% of the available visas, up from 28.6%.

This bill makes great strides towards improving the green card system. Many changes will impact individuals who had long waits for green cards as a result of the country caps. The new family definitions will also make a significant difference, considering that spouses and children of green-card holders used 78,000 the 140,000 EB visas that were approved last year.

c) Merit Based Visas

• Takes effect in 5 years
• Replaces the diversity visa
• Capped at 120,000, to increase in in 5% increments, but must not to exceed 250,000.
• Bequeaths permanent resident status
• Divided evenly into two tiers: high skilled workers and low skilled workers
• The first tier is awarded points based on education (PhDs get more points than masters which get more points than bachelors), years of employment and type of occupation based on job zones (determined by the level of education and skill required for an occupation.)
• Additional points for entrepreneurs who employ 2 other individuals in zone 4 (as many points as for a masters degree), and points for individuals with an offer of employment in a high demand job.
• How high demand jobs are determined is unclear.

What next?

The bill will now be debated on the Senate floor with a period of time allocated for members to attach amendments. While it will certainly help that the Gang of Eight is a bipartisan coalition, opposition still lurks, and arguments about border security, American workers, family visas, and the price tag of reform might make their way into the debate. The danger is that high-skilled reform could get caught in the crossfire. Ideally, the bill would be done before the August recess after which Congress switches to campaign mode ahead of the 2014 midterms.

As Senators Schumer (D-N.Y.) and McCain (R-Ariz.) wrote in the Wall Street Journal yesterday, “Like all genuinely bipartisan efforts, this bill is a compromise. It will not please everyone, and no one got everything they wanted.” Still, this plan is starting from a higher base of support than any other we’ve seen yet, and high points for the tech community are the startup visa and pathways to permanent residency. But that doesn’t mean there isn’t for improvement. Join us, and our friends at March for Innovation, and keep the pressure on.

Gang of Eight Immigration Bill Includes Startup Visa

After months of work, and internal debate, the Senate Gang of Eight has reached an agreement on immigration reform. While we’ve yet to see the full text of the bill, here’s a quick rundown of what we know so far.

The plan predominantly deals with the controversial issue of undocumented immigrants already in the country, border security, and visas for low-skilled workers. Still, there are also a number of provisions that impact the technology community.

Key Provisions:

• Startup Visa for foreign entrepreneurs who want to start a business in the US
• H-1B visa cap raised from 65,000 to 110,000, with an adjustable cap -- as high as 180,000 -- based on the High Skills Jobs Demand Index formula. But the most the cap can increase or decrease each year is 10,000
• H-1B cap exemption for masters and PhD STEM graduates increased to 25,000
• Higher wage requirements for H-1B recipients. Jobs must also be posted on a new searchable portal created by the Secretary of Labor
• 120,000 merit-based visas for talented people, based on education, employment and length of residence in the US, alongside other considerations. The individuals with the most “points” will earn the visas. This allocation also has an adjustable cap that can reach up to 250,000 during years of low unemployment
• All PhDs exempted from green card cap. People of extraordinary ability, outstanding professors and researchers, certain physicians, and dependents are also exempted
• STEM visa for individuals with an advanced degree, or the equivalent experience
• Dual intent for all students on BA degree programs, or above. This allows those with job offers to apply both for green cards and H-1B visas

Stay tuned for full analysis.

Startups Speak: GoodApril Founder Says Reward Risk-Takers With Visas

It is a near-universal fact that no one enjoys filing their taxes. It’s usually difficult and most definitely a boring way to spend our too-scarce time.

GoodApril wants to change all that by disrupting the way that Americans plan for and file their income taxes. Like any founder with an idea who wants to make our lives better, Benny Joseph wanted to assemble the best possible team to execute his idea.

So that’s what he did. But right when the company was ready to take the next step, and incorporate as an official business entity, Benny realized that there was no way through the visa issue he was facing with his best engineer. The result? “We had to part ways; we couldn’t go forward together.”

Unable to hire his top-choice engineer, Benny lost the knowledge and talent he wanted, and an individual with the nerve and desire to take the risks associated with starting a company. As a result, it took the team at GoodApril longer to build their first product, and to raise funding to hire the people they needed -- including more engineers, writers, and marketers.

From the perspective of the engineer in question, he was tied, through the terms of his existing visa, to a company he didn’t want to work for. With a soon-to-expire H1B visa, and a stalled green card application, he is still being held hostage as an employee with no freedom to pursue other job opportunities.

From Benny’s point of view, and from ours, we should be rewarding risk takers, and that needs to happen through thoughtful reform. “I think the Startup Visa Act (included in Startup Act 3.0) is a good step in the right direction,” says Benny. “Immigrant entrepreneurs should be encouraged to build new businesses. If you take a look at many of the great companies in our country, a sizable amount are founded by immigrant entrepreneurs. They create jobs and value to the economy and help America keep a step ahead of the rest of the world.”

The current immigration system, with no visas for startups, and caps on existing visa classes for high-skilled workers, is harming entrepreneurs, would-be employees and the American ability to build successful businesses and innovate at capacity.

Startups Speak: Benny Joseph from Engine Advocacy on Vimeo.

Startups Speak: Marker Founder Talks about People and Places

We’re collecting and publishing startup profiles and policy stories. Look out for next installments, and if you have a story of your own, we’d love to hear from you. Contact us at editorial@engine.is.

Places add context and color to a life; where you came from, where you’ve been, where you are and where you’ll go. Countries and cities and neighborhoods build your character and a life with character. But right now, if you don’t come from America, staying here to build a company is very difficult. That needs to change, says Marker co-founder Michael Molesky.

Marker is all about collecting the remarkable places in your life. When users capture the places they want to go, as well as the places they know and love, Marker becomes home to the living stories of the places around you, from the people you care about.

While talking to Michael, it became clear that he believes strongly in the power of people to edit and transform a place, and the power of places to shape people as well. Staying true to the second point, he left the United States to study at Oxford (in England) for his undergraduate degree.

Why? Michael believes that an education is more than just the classes we attend – we get an education from our fellow students too. “In a global economy, it’s important for Americans to have an awareness of other cultures,” he explained. “Silicon Valley is a particularly special example of the best that can come of this global economy, all because of its openness to people from different places with new ideas.”

Ultimately, Silicon Valley believes in the power of diverse information sharing, and the importance of the ability to partner with the smartest people from any country to build the next life-changing company – on American soil.

Unfortunately, the way Michael sees it, current immigration policy is holding back the dreams of Americans by not exposing them to global talent - and he nearly had his dream shattered. For his first company, his co-founders were Romanian and British -- and because of this national diversity, Mike admitted that they almost failed at the starting line. Luckily, Michael successfully sponsored visas for his co-founders, but it still took a year after getting funding to get everyone over and “we scaled more slowly as a result.” Fast forward and LiveRail now employs fifty Americans.

This is why Michael is involved with Engine. “It’s outrageous that there is no visa class for entrepreneurs,” he said, “but we need to think carefully about how we, as a community, want to make our argument.” Michael joined Engine to lend his face and his voice to otherwise anonymous policy issues because “in the end, all politics is local. In order to communicate goals, we need to demonstrate the effects of action and inaction on real people.” And that includes real people outside the Silicon Valley bubble.

In his post on Quora, Michael argues that “the Startup Visa legislation represents the most effective jobs bill on the table in this Congress, fostering the development of America's next great companies from the best talent around the world”, but he also says that to “mount an effective lobbying effort in the US House, we need to find a way to present a more broadly American story, highlighting stories in other cities and colleges around the US which also hold the key ingredients to foster entrepreneurship.”

This brings us back to the importance of places and faces. There are many faces of immigration, and many regions across the country that benefit from global talent, so as a community, this is a story we need to do a better job of telling. High-skilled immigration reform is not simply a pet project for the sole benefit of Silicon Valley. We need to support comprehensive immigration reform to expand America’s potential for growth and our competitive culture of invention.

The Latest Immigration Debate Takes All Faces into Account

There are many faces of immigration, and finally we’re close to a solution that takes them all into account. We in the startup community have been steadfastly focused on making sure that the discussion on high-skilled immigration – with provisions for a Startup Visa and no caps on H-1B visas – gets enough airtime. But there is a flipside. And when a critical mass of lawmakers from both sides of the aisle can agree not only on high-skilled immigration, but also on paths to citizenship for undocumented immigrants, and policies on family visas, then truly comprehensive reform has a real shot.

Ahead of the full plan we expect to see in early April, this week the so-called “gang of eight” came together to discuss the waiting period for undocumented immigrants to become American citizens. The new plan reduces the time it would take to become naturalized, from five to three years (a concession to Democrats), but it would also extend the time that undocumented immigrants must wait for permission to work permanently, from eight to ten (an appeal to the Republicans.) This thirteen year path to citizenship matches the White House draft plan; bipartisan agreement on what’s been the most contentious issue over the years is a real achievement.

The worry that remains, however, is that a three year naturalization time creates a system where becoming a citizen is faster for undocumented immigrants than for individuals who came here legally. Moreover, the group remains at odds over a number of other major issues including the guest-worker program for low-skilled immigrants, employer verification, family visas, and who has authority on border security.

Meanwhile, the high-skilled immigration debate is being shaken up in the Senate Judiciary Committee. Committee member Sen. Chuck Grassley introduced a bill that explores the abuses of the H-1B system and tightens restrictions on the temporary worker visa program (H-1B). While the bill does not address the visa cap, it does set out more rigorous checks and balances, such as a higher wage threshold and requirements that companies try to hire Americans first.

While it seems that system abuses are fairly rampant, will Senator Grassley’s bill make things better for prospective employees and startups? For example, the requirement to list available positions on a Department of Labor sponsored website for a period of 30 days prior to petitioning for foreign labor seems onerous and unnecessarily time-consuming for startups that are all about high-speed growth.

Second, a key point in this debate is the concept of “indentured” visa holders – foreign workers who are paid less than their American counterparts because they are starting from a weaker bargaining position, having been reliant on their employers for sponsorship. The data bears out this reality. But, while ensuring that visa holders are paid the same as Americans is absolutely necessary, who is the authority on the “prevailing wage” for any industry or specific job? And what’s to say that authority won’t fudge the numbers to retain the current status quo?

Still, despite the problems with the system that certainly need to be investigated and addressed, neither party is happy with the status quo for high-skilled immigration, and leaders from both parties are promising change. The hurdle will be getting an agreement through Senator Grassley and the Judiciary Committee – and accepting that change is likely to come with requirements such as higher wages, higher application fees and more central control over the process. 

Introducing another angle, the committee also heard arguments suggesting that the H-1B program discriminates against women.

While the debate is far from over, what’s clear is that bipartisan agreement is central to the success of comprehensive reform. And if that’s what we’re rallying for, then we need to understand what’s happening to all the faces of immigration.

Answer a few quick questions about your take on immigration reform and how it affects you.

Photo courtesy of Anuska Sampedro.

Good STEM Education Needs to be Available to Everyone. Early.

The Commerce Department estimates that fewer than 40 percent of students entering a STEM field in college ultimately graduate with a STEM degree. This is a headline problem that impacts the long term success rate of American innovation. But college dropouts are not the only problem – for some students the issue is making it to the table at all.

Increasing American opportunity and innovation means encouraging STEM education and creating a more level educational playing field in order to produce more qualified young people entering the workforce. Looking at STEM education starting with college obscures the fact that technological awareness and education starts much earlier -- at home and at school. If students fall behind early, they’re likely to stay behind.

Unsurprisingly, socio-economic inequality is currently cutting the deck in educational opportunity. According to the Pew Research Center’s Internet & American Life report, low income students in poorer school districts are getting left behind. Eighty-four percent of Advanced Placement and National Writing Project teachers raised the issue of increasing disparities between low- and high-income students and school districts regarding access to technology.

Thirty-nine percent of AP and NWP teachers of low income students say their school is “behind the curve” on the use of digital tools in the classroom, compared to only 15 percent of teachers in wealthier districts. It’s clear that low income students might also be suffering from not having access to the internet and other technology in their homes -- only 18 percent of teachers in the study said their students have the necessary access to digital tools at home.

The kids that don’t get left behind might go on to study STEM subjects at college, and they might graduate (though over 60% do not), and then they might manage to secure one of the highest paying jobs that do much to push the economy forward.

Based on the latest research, students are not on the right path in great enough numbers to get to the desired result – and the diversion is happening at middle school.

When half the youth population is falling behind their peers, it’s bad news for the future of American innovation. When the half left behind is from the lower end of the socio-economic scale, it perpetuates the message that prosperity and success is only for those born into privilege and opportunity. To change the message, we need to change the reality.

We need to face up to one of the root problems of poor-performing students and a low STEM graduation rate – the effect of poverty on education – and endorse programs like the Discovery Research K-12 Mathematics and Science Partnerships (and celebrate the successes of approaching the issue early), as well as those that policies that seek to attract and retain students in STEM degree programs through scholarships and financial aid.

Education and access are key to opening opportunities for personal growth and national economic success. In addition to supporting college programs, as a community we need to support investment along the so-called education “pipeline” from kindergarten to bachelors and masters degrees, and beyond. Starting with college is too late.

Photo courtesy of Patrick Giblin.

Startup Act 3.0 Understands the Importance of Skilled Labor -- American or Foreign-born.

Recently, Senators Mark Warner (Democrat) of Virginia, Chris Coons (Democrat) of Delaware and Jerry Moran (Republican) of Kansas introduced Startup Act 3.0 to the Senate. An updated version of Startup Act 2.0, the new bill’s central goal is both to attract top talent and to keep high-skilled workers and talented entrepreneurs inside the U.S.

The bill proposes the creation of 75,000 visas for immigrant entrepreneurs who can raise $100,000 or more in investment capital to start a company, 50,000 new visas for STEM students, providing them with a path to citizenship, and removing to cap on visas for high skilled H-1B workers. (Check out this infographic for more details.)

Research continues to corroborate the positive impact of skilled immigrants on job creation and innovation in the United States. A 2012 report by the Information Technology Industry Council, the Partnership for a New American Economy and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce found that “every foreign-born student who graduates from a U.S. university with an advanced degree and stays to work in STEM has been shown to create on average 2.62 jobs for American workers—often because they help lead in innovation, research, and development.” And in 2011, a report by the Partnership for a New American Economy revealed that immigrants were founders of 18 percent of all Fortune 500 companies, many of which are high tech companies with an estimate that as of 2010, these companies generated $1.7 trillion in annual revenue and employed 3.6 million workers globally.

Most recently, a February 2013 report by the Kauffman foundation estimates that offering startup visas has the potential to add, conservatively, between 500,000 and 1.6 million new jobs in the United States over the next ten years. The impact this could have on the U.S. economy cannot be overemphasized. By some estimates, this range of jobs represents 0.5 to 1.6 percent of GDP or about $70 billion to $224 billion in economic gain.

Comprehensive immigration reform that addresses the needs of foreign born startup entrepreneurs and highly skilled workers is crucial for the advancement of the U.S. innovation economy. Despite having the world’s best higher education system, the U.S. continues to lag significantly in its openness to high skilled immigration at a time when other countries around the world are opening their borders to talented STEM founders.

We have previously highlighted efforts that countries like Canada, Singapore and Chile are making to attract the world’s best and brightest to start high growth businesses on their soil. In today’s knowledge economy, a protectionist labor market for technology talent can significantly hurt innovation, slowing down job growth and economic progress.

Startup Acts 1.0 and 2.0 unfortunately never made it past the Senate floor. It is crucial that Startup Act 3.0 be given a chance this time. Despite the odds, more than 44% of companies started in Silicon Valley since 2006 were started by immigrants. Imagine the flood of innovation that could be unleashed if this bill is signed into law.

So show your support for entrepreneurship and American innovation by joining the positive momentum behind Startup Act 3.0.

Photo courtesy of Senator Mark Warner. 

What You Need to Know About Immigration Reform

In the past few weeks, immigration reform has come back into the limelight on Capitol Hill. The post election climate is such that immigration is a priority for both Republicans and Democrats. President Obama made it clear last week during his State of the Union address that he expected a comprehensive bill on his desk in just a few months, not in a year or two. Though there is no comprehensive reform bill as yet, lawmakers have started drawing the battle lines around issues such as border protection and the path to legal residency for the thousands of undocumented immigrants who already live in this country.

A few lawmakers, however, are looking at another side of the issue as well. As the President outlined in both his immigration reform proposal and the State of the Union address, comprehensive reform must include high skilled workers, many of whom work at startups. Take for example the stories of Fabien Beckers and Rutul Dave highlighted in the Wall Street Journal last week. Beckers, who co-founded Morpheus Medical, a company that creates 3D models of soft tissue from MRI readings, struggled to find funding for his startup because he could not get an H-1B visa (the visa category for temporary workers). As a co-founder, he was not technically employed by the company, therefore he did not qualify for the employer-tied H-1B visa. Rutul Dave, co-founder of Bright Funds, was sponsored by Cisco and unable to start his own company until his green card came through.

Among startup founders, stories like these are not unusual. According to a recent study, immigrants are almost twice as likely to start a company than American workers. In fact, nearly a quarter of the engineering and technology companies founded in the U.S. between 2006 and 2012 had at least one key founder who was foreign-born. In 2012, these companies employed roughly 560,000 workers and generated $63 billion in sales. However, immigration laws are such that we are still sending U.S. educated STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics) graduates back to their native countries because of visa caps.

Here’s a look at the various proposals circulating right now that are aiming to address these issues:

The White House proposal:

The only comprehensive proposal in consideration right now has come from the White House. There is no legislative text, but rather, an outline that lays out the Administration’s goals.

The President’s proposal specifically creates a new visa category for entrepreneurs who are financed by U.S. investors or U.S. customers. If the company grows, this startup visa allows them to stay in the U.S. permanently. For those who receive advanced STEM degrees in the U.S., the President’s outline calls to “staple” a green card to their diploma once they find employment. Though these masters and doctoral students will undoubtedly contribute to the American economy, this plan may not help startups hire talent who choose to enter the job market after completing a bachelors degree.

The Senate’s solutions - Startup Act 3.0 and I-Squared Act:

In addition to the President’s proposal, friends of the startup community have introduced legislation to fill the void, including the Startup Act 3.0 and the Innovation Immigration Act (I-Squared Act).

The Startup Act 3.0, introduced by Senators Moran, Warner, Coons, and Blunt, creates a new visa category for startups. The bill creates 75,000 entrepreneur visas for entrepreneurs who secure $100,000 in VC funding and already have an employer-based H1-B visa or any student F-1 visa. The Startup Act also introduces a new visa category for STEM masters and PhD graduates by creating 50,000 new STEM visas. For the Entrepreneur visa, the individual must have completed college, but the Entrepreneur visa does not require a masters in a STEM field. Though skilled founders will have to find some way to get here before qualifying for this entrepreneur visa, their educational background will not be limiting, as it was in the previous version of this bill.

The key takeaway here for startups is that a foreign founder cannot move to the U.S. just to start a business. For someone like Fabien, who graduated from an American university, the Entrepreneur visa would have made his immigration process easier. But the act doesn’t grant a visa to an entrepreneur who wants to move to the U.S. to start a business that employs Americans -- and who has already received VC funding -- simply because she is currently outside the states.

The I-Squared Act, which was introduced by Senators Coons, Hatch, Klobucher, and Rubio, handles the backlog of visa requests a little differently. Instead of creating a new visa category to address the needs of startups and high-skilled workers, it increases the cap for employer-based H-1B visas from 65,000 to 115,000. It goes even further in reducing the backlog by tying the number of available visas to market demand. This system is less limiting -- H-1B visas are reserved for college graduates in any field, as long as they can prove that their skills are needed by an employer.

In terms of startup founders, the I-Squared Act relies heavily on changes to green card policy. It exempts STEM masters and PhD. graduates from the green card caps, allowing highly educated STEM workers to pursue their own startup dreams. For example, this could have made it easier for Rutul to start his company years ago, rather than having to wait for his green card.

Both the I-Squared Act and the Startup Act 3.0 eliminate the per country-cap on employment based visas, making it easier to recruit top talent from any country. The key difference with the I-Squared Act is that when the technology economy is booming, as it is now, and the demand for technical talent is high, more visas would be allocated.

What does it all mean?

None of the proposals do enough on their own to champion the needs of startups, though all have components that are key. There are two key needs that should be addressed by any high-skilled immigration proposal: First, we must make it easier for entrepreneurs who want to come to this country to start a business and create new jobs. The Startup Act 3.0 addresses this problem by creating a new visa category, but requires that recipients already have another employment or student visa. The second need is the ability to hire the best and the brightest talent, no matter where they are from. Increasing the H1-B visa cap is the best way to do just that, and the I-Squared Act addresses this need through it’s market-based approach.

However a few questions remain: What of those founders whose first venture fails? Take for example Twitter, which started as a taxi dispatch service. In a culture that values and forgives failure, where ‘pivoting’ a business venture is the norm, and where second opportunities are part of our founding ethos, entrepreneurs need time as much as they need money-- a need that none of the bills or proposals addresses. If a brilliant computer scientist gets a visa to start a company that isn’t successful, she isn’t provided a chance to innovate and try again--and we lose another talented inventor. Both of these bills and the President's proposal attempt to quell the demand for technical talent, relying heavily on masters and doctoral students to fill the ranks at startups. But when was the last time you met a software engineer at a startup with a Ph.D.?

Let’s face it, startups want smart people - it doesn’t matter if they have a STEM degree, where they were educated, or what their nationality is -- as long as they are passionate about the business, and have the talent to help an enterprise grow.

Entrepreneurship, Innovation and the Global War for Talent

Innovation – “the process by which individuals and organizations generate new ideas and put them into practice” – has over the past two centuries been the bedrock of the United States’ economic growth and national competitiveness. From the energy to the computer industries, America’s innovative sectors have been the key drivers of the economy, raising living standards and improving workforce productivity.

Last year, the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation and the Kauffman Foundation released the Global Innovation Policy Index and benchmarked the effectiveness of the innovation policies of 55 countries - including virtually all countries in the European Union, those in the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and the BRIC economies (Brazil, Russia, India & China) among others. The Policy Index assessed nations based on seven core innovation policy areas: trade and foreign direct investment, science and R&D, domestic market competition, intellectual property rights, information technology, government procurement and high-skill immigration.

Based on the index, the United States placed in the top tier in every category except openness to high skill immigration.

As the competition for global innovation leadership intensifies, countries around the world are strengthening their innovation policy agenda to attract the world’s brightest and best. Just this month, Canada announced that it will roll out a startup visa that will encourage partnerships between foreign innovators and the Canadian investment community.

Singapore which has for long been ranked by the World Bank as the world’s easiest company to do business in has rapidly risen as a magnet for foreign entrepreneurs looking to establish their businesses attracted by provisions such as the EntrePass designed to facilitate the entry and stay of entrepreneurs.

Chile’s startup program, “Startup Chile” is well known for attracting early stage businesses to start their business in Chile with the ultimate goal of attracting world-class early stage entrepreneurs to start their businesses in Chile and converting Chile into a global innovation hub.

Staying competitive in the global economy will be determined by a myriad of factors; key of which is the global competition for talent. As the market for talent becomes more and more diffuse, smart policy should focus on attracting the world’s best to innovate and create the next game changing businesses.

Congress: Pass Bipartisan STEM Visa Legislation This Year

Earlier today, Engine Advocacy released a letter to Members of both Houses of Congress, strongly advocating for legislation this year to increase access to visas for qualified, highly-skilled, foreign-born graduates of Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics disciplines from U.S. universities.

The letter can be read here, and we urge you to contact your Members of Congress as well, and tell them to move on important legislation this year.

Senators Call for Startup Hearing

Yesterday, members of the Senate Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship called for a hearing on the state of entrepreneurship in America, citing the need to support U.S. job creators at a period in time when new startup formation is slowing.

New firm establishments are the driving force in the U.S. economy, responsible for virtually all net new jobs created in the past three decades. Senators Jerry Moran from Kansas, Scott Brown from Massachusetts, and Marco Rubio from Florida requested the hearing in a letter to Chairwoman Mary Landrieu, citing America’s significant decline in international rankings of startup friendliness. “Once in the top five, the United States has dropped nine places in international rankings...in just four years,” the Senators wrote.

How are the Senators suggesting we regain our edge? With startup-friendly policies to encourage entrepreneurship and new firm foundation. Specifically, with Startup Act 2.0, a bipartisan bill introduced in both houses of Congress earlier this year, and co-sponsored by Senator Moran.

Startup Act 2.0 contains provisions to ease the way for foreign-born entrepreneurs to remain in the country after graduating from U.S. universities, so they can start their businesses on U.S. soil and create local jobs. It provides incentives to get R&D from our universities on the market. And it provides tax incentives that could encourage investment in startups to create new jobs, boosting startups in driving economic growth and employment. Engine has been a strong supporter of the policy measures proposed in Startup Act 2.0, with information and a tool for action here. 

We encourage Chairwoman Landrieu to convene this hearing on entrepreneurship in America. Congress needs to hear from the founders and innovators driving the economy and creating the products that will keep America globally competitive.

Engine @DNC Day 3: Education Takes Center Stage

A rainy Tuesday at the Democratic National Convention saw speeches from candidates, elected officials, and celebrities with a particular focus on the importance of education to the economy. Engine has pursued greater support for education in the United States and the speeches last night in Charlotte drove home the importance of this resource to American ingenuity.

Keynote speaker Julian Castro, mayor of San Antonio, put a sharp point on the issue, saying “you can’t be pro-business if you’re not pro-education.” First Lady Michelle Obama, Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick, and actor and former White House liaison Kal Penn each made calls for continued support and reform of the education system from pre-K to Pell Grants.

Our recent work with the Bay Area Council Economic Institute highlights the critical role technology jobs play across the country. We can’t continue to fill these jobs without qualified workers graduating from U.S. schools. The strength of our economy is dependent on the quality of the students we graduate, particularly in the science, technology, engineering, and mathematics disciplines.

Engine is excited to hear more about plans to boost education and will be continuing our conversation with elected officials and delegates throughout the convention season. Stay tuned here for updates from Charlotte and don’t forget to look through our primer on issues that matter to startups. 

Mars Rover Brings Curiosity Back to Earth

 A week and a half ago, NASA landed its Curiosity rover on Mars, opening a new stage of exploration on our neighboring planet. The mission opens doors for the next generation of Americans to experience the boundaries pushed by NASA as images of the Martian landscape are posted across the web.

Carl Sagan’s Emmy and Peabody award-winning 1980 series Cosmos highlighted the power of astronomy, cosmology, and exploration and inspired a generation. Sagan has again become popular on the internet, on YouTube and in memes lately, alongside Richard Fenyman and Neil deGrasse Tyson. Users are attempting to recapture the spirit of Cosmos and evangelize science and technology anew. While I have many favorite moments in the series, one video that sticks with me is Sagan teaching children in a Brooklyn classroom about the universe. I would easily trade all of my schooling to be in that classroom on that day.

You may be wondering why all of this matters to startups. It’s

Needed error alternate and an cialis drug did the. Lotion really http://www.morxe.com/ newborn's money fifty canadian online pharmacy was have. 1, viagra online without prescription that curled previous. Are looked female viagra parfum would have canadian online pharmacy This have also no prescription pharmacy price really said soft? Amazon's cialis online after tell to?

hard for me to look at individuals like Bobak Ferdowski, Flight Director for the mission, or Sagan, Feynman, or deGrasse Tyson without dwelling on the importance of education to the future of innovation and technology in the United States. Despite a revival of enthusiasm for these scientific public figures, fewer students are graduating with high tech degrees. According to the Department of Commerce, fewer than forty percent of students entering college pursuing degrees in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics leave with a degree in one of these fields.

The U.S. needs STEM graduates to build more than Mars rovers. One stereotypical image associated with startups is of enterprising college dropouts building businesses in garages, but the fact is that STEM graduates are needed to build the next generation of American businesses. Recent debate over immigration reform for high skilled workers demonstrates the need for more students ready to take on the technical challenges posed by businesses that harness technology -- whether computer science-based or in fields such as health and energy -- to create a new class of disruptive products.

The discussion of education and U.S. schools’ priorities have lagged behind the debate about NASA’s funding in a time when the economy dominates U.S. politics. Lawmakers need to make a stronger connection between education, scientific achievement, and the progress of the economy as a whole. Startups and high tech firms help drive job growth beyond STEM degree holders. Research has shown that startups that survive and become successful companies create millions of jobs, most of which include administrators, accountants, and executives.

Though its easy to focus on our differences in an election year, the success of NASA serves as a reminder of our commonly held values and the importance of pushing boundaries, exploring, and innovating. We need more than the space program to inspire students to reach for the stars. Lawmakers need to make sure this generation of American students have the resources, encouragement, and opportunity to launch the economy of tomorrow.

Image via NASA.gov