The editorial in question was a new low even for the WSJ. Let me point out a few of the facts:
1. The WSJ used a dubious study from the Federal Reserve that claimed H- 1B does not negatively affect wages to justify its buttertion that H-1B does not hurt Americans. All fine and dandy but the WSJ failed to mentionthe same study found that H-1b caused EMPLOYMENT among Americas.
2. On argument I could not understand was the WSJ used a table purported to be the number of visas issued each year to make a claim that H-1B usage was economically driver. Unfortunately, for many of the years, the figure wrong.
For example the WSJ claimed 65,000 h-1b visas were issued last year. There were 65,000 visas that applied to the quota, 10,000 additional visas that were illegally issued in excess of the quota, about 8,000 more issued under the new exemption for U.S. graduates and a yet unknown number that did not apply to the quota. Probably the actual figure will be over 100,000.
3. I don't know how they WSJ could make the claim that limiting H-1B visas will increase offshoring. If that were the case why would the Indian government be lobbying for MORE H-1B visas. The largest users of H-1B visas are the offshoring companies themselves.
