Thread by @r_zwetsloot

Drawing on forthcoming research, (twitterless) Will Hunt and I argue in @WSJ that two popular policy goals — (1) supply chain security for computer chips, and (2) immigration restrictions — are almost certainly incompatible.

Here's why. [1/x]

wsj.com/articles/ameri…

First, why care about chip supply chains? One, DOD worries adversaries could sabotage chips used in US infrastructure and weapons systems — if chips were manufactured here, there'd be more security. It could also create much-needed jobs. [2/x]

on.wsj.com/2B9z25f

For these two reasons, senior policymakers have pushed for more advanced semiconductor foundries to be built in the US. The White House, with some success, is using carrots and sticks to get semiconductor companies on board in that effort. [3/x]

on.wsj.com/2XIu4UV

Second, the latest on immigration: reports suggest that suspensions of the H1B and Optional Practical Training (OPT) programs — the two largest programs that allow for temporary work in the US — seem imminent. [4/x]


politi.co/2zIJjoy

US chip companies depend on int'l graduates and workers. Our research shows >40% of high-end semi workers and >60% of grad students in the US were born abroad.

Intel: “without OPT we would be able to hire just 30% of the highly skilled graduates we currently hire.” [5/x]

US companies like Intel still need int'l tech talent today. Covid-19 has led to tragic national unemployment rates, but @NFAPResearch shows demand in high-tech sectors remains high — with unemployment appearing to actually decline slightly. [6/x]

forbes.com/sites/stuartan…

The US can and should definitely train more domestic semiconductor talent. We didn’t have space to get into it in the op-ed, but the history of New York’s Tech Valley is a great and inspirational example here. I highly recommend reading about it. [7/x] ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK15882…

But such domestic initiatives will take years to pay off. In the meantime, American workers *won’t* benefit from immigration restrictions that cause labor shortages — @BrittaGlennon’s research shows shortages will lead to outsourcing instead. [8/x]

papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cf…

The big winner from immigration restrictions wouldn’t be American workers but the Chinese government. Chinese analysts have written extensively about how the country struggles to train, attract, and retain top semiconductor talent. [9/x] eefocus.com/mcu-dsp/424622…

US immigration restrictions would give China two gifts. One, they’d slow American technological progress. Two, they’d help China fill its talent gaps. We very frequently come across quotes that show China (a) fears US immigration reforms, and (b) hopes for restrictions. [10/x]

The US faces a choice between securing high-tech supply chains — for which it’ll need all the high-skilled workers it can get — and cutting off a big chunk of its high-tech talent pipeline because it’s good politics.

It should choose supply chains. [11/x]

Immigration is a national security issue. DOD et al. are understandably hesitant to touch the politics, but they’re also one of the few remaining players with enough weight to push back against policies that would hurt the national interest. [12/x]
wsj.com/articles/forei…

Our @CSETGeorgetown paper on the US semiconductor workforce, which will include much more data and policy discussions, will hopefully be coming out in the next couple of months. In the meantime, let’s hope we don’t shoot ourselves in the foot. [13/13]