Yes
They should.
No
They shouldn’t.
Few issues combine immigration and the economy as directly as the question of whether U.S. immigration policy should give greater priority to American workers.
For decades, Washington has debated how to balance several competing goals: protecting jobs and wages for U.S. citizens, giving American businesses access to needed workers, attracting highly skilled talent, supporting industries facing labor shortages and maintaining a legal immigration system that benefits the country.
President Donald Trump has made the protection of American workers a major part of his immigration agenda.
In September, the Trump administration extended restrictions involving the H-1B program, which allows employers to hire certain highly skilled foreign workers. The White House argues that some companies and outsourcing firms have misused the program in ways that can displace American workers or put downward pressure on wages. The administration says its changes are intended to favor highly skilled positions while protecting employment opportunities and pay for U.S. workers.
Supporters of an “American workers first” approach argue that immigration policy should never encourage companies to replace qualified U.S. employees simply because foreign labor may be less expensive.
They believe Congress should require employers to make a serious effort to recruit American workers and pay competitive wages before using employment-based visa programs.
Critics warn that the issue is more complicated.
Many American industries rely on immigrant labor, including agriculture, technology, construction, health care and hospitality. Companies sometimes argue that they cannot find enough qualified domestic workers to fill specialized or difficult-to-staff positions.
There are also broader demographic concerns. The United States has an aging population, and slower workforce growth can create challenges for businesses looking to expand. Reuters recently reported that stricter immigration policies are among the factors limiting U.S. labor-force growth even while unemployment remains relatively low.
That means Congress faces a difficult balancing act.
Lawmakers could strengthen requirements designed to prevent businesses from undercutting American wages while still allowing legal immigration when employers can demonstrate genuine shortages or a need for specialized talent.
The debate does not necessarily have to be reduced to being either “for” or “against” immigration. A more fundamental question is what the primary purpose of employment-based immigration policy should be.
Should protecting the wages, opportunities and bargaining power of American citizens come first when Congress writes those laws?
Or does the broader economy benefit when companies have greater flexibility to recruit workers from around the world?