|
July 31, 2004
If We Need Immigrant PhDs, Why Are American PhDs Poor And Unemployed?
There they go again.
Another report on the (allegedly)
vital role of immigrants in the U.S.
science and engineering workforce—implicitly
bemoaning the competence of native-born Americans.
Says the author of the
report,
Stuart Anderson, Executive Director of the
National Foundation for American Policy and a
notorious Beltway Conservative
immigration enthusiast:
“If those who most
oppose immigration had succeeded over the past two
decades, two-thirds of the most outstanding future
scientists and mathematicians in the United States would
not be in the country…”
[Stuart Anderson,
“The Multiplier Effect,” Summer 2004,
International Educator,
Anderson’s “evidence”
is amazingly thin, mere factoids like “Seven of the
top 10 award winners of the Intel Science Talent
Search in 2004 were immigrants or their children.”
Nevertheless, he goes
on to urge expansion of high-tech immigration programs
like
H-1b and
student visas.
In fact, the
long-increasing propensity of Americans to get high-tech
PhDs does seem to have come to a
screeching halt:
[Table1.]
 | The number science
Ph.D.s awarded to U.S. citizens rose from 11,408 in
1987 to 13,672 in 1998. |
 | But in 2002 (latest
year of data), only 12,423 U.S. citizens received a
Ph.D. in science |
 | The number of
engineering PhDs. awarded to U.S. citizens rose from
1,887 in 1987 to 3,516 in 1996. |
 | But in 2002, only
1,890 engineering Ph.D.s were awarded to U.S. citizens |
And non-U.S. citizens
have certainly garnered an increasing share of advanced
degrees:
 | Non-citizens received
32 percent of all science Ph.D.s awarded in 2002, up
from 24 percent in 1987 |
 | Non-citizens received
61 percent of engineering Ph.D.s awarded in 2002, up
from 55 percent in 1987 |
But there’s a very good
reason for the
waning presence of Americans in science and
engineering: the
dismal career prospects facing them in a field
increasingly inundated by
foreign students.
According to a National
Research Council study: [National Research Council,
Building a Workforce for the Information Economy,
National Academies Press, 2001.]
 | Income
foregone during a 5-year doctoral program exceeds the
additional income received over the course of a
native-born graduate’s working lifetime |
The National Science
Foundation explicitly acknowledges the problem, saying
that for American students
“the effective premium for acquiring a Ph.D may actually
be negative.”
Yet, paradoxically, NSF
makes matters worse by advocating special programs to
increase the number of foreign doctoral students.
The perception of a
high-tech labor “shortage” is firmly entrenched
and drives much immigration policy.
But if such a shortage
were real, unemployment in science and engineering
fields would be declining. And exactly the opposite is
happening [Table 2]:
 | Unemployment among
college-educated science and engineering personnel is
at a 20-year high (3.9 percent in 2002, the latest
year of data.) |
 | Unemployment among
computer programmers is also at a 20-year high
(6.5 percent). It has risen 4-fold since 2000 |
These unemployment
rates understate the problem. They do not count people
with science and engineering degrees who’ve
left the field involuntarily for other jobs. NSF
data indicate about three-quarters of science degree
holders eventually end up in non-science occupations.
If Mr. Anderson and his
ilk have their way, foreign science students will simply
continue to
displace Americans in
academia and the workplace.
There’s nothing magic
or mysterious about this. Employers have simply gotten
the government to sandbag
labor—in this case,
educated labor.
But only an immigration
enthusiast would argue that it’s moral.
[Number fans
click here for tables.]
Edwin S. Rubenstein (email
him) is President of
ESR Research Economic Consultants in Indianapolis. |