Blogspot has some limitations when it comes to formatting HTML. Because of this, you are encouraged to reference the webpage of this blog here:
http://www.freedomcast.com/h1b/H1bSham.html.
77% of H-1b Applications are Certified by the DOL below the average prevailing wagesNormally I detail what an H-1b visa is in my writings, however the reader of this is presumed to know that already. Please seek information on Wikipedia or other sources if you are unfamiliar with the subject and then refer back to these statistics so that you understand who is impacted by it.
In 2005 there were 279,719 LCAs certified by the Department of Labor for Programmer and Programmer/Analyst occupations. The average salary for these jobs going to foreign guest workers stands at $53,024. Median annual earnings of America computer programmers was $62,890 in May 2004; although the average rose slightly in 2005 we will use the more conservative 2004 averages for these purposes.
What this means is that the H-1b program has enabled companies to underpay programmers by 15.6 percent or $9,866 each year. I am a software developer and have the LCA database stored on my personal server, it was made available by the US Department of Labor. Running a simple query returned these startling results.
According to the DOL starting salary ranges are as follows for American programmers in 2004:
... See
Link for Data
What this proves is that the H-1b program is being used for labor arbitrage - simply put companies are flooding the labor markets in an effort to lower labor costs. 46% percent of all H-1b programmers are certified by the Department of Labor for pay BELOW $50,000 each year. Additionally, 77% of programmers are certified for wages below the average prevailing wage in this occupation.
This has been driven by deception from industry lobbyists like the ITAA. They say there have been shortages of programmers. In fact, programmers have less jobs as they did in the year 2000. Many people still may believe that there is a shortage of programmers because of misinformation. I produced a paper that should dispell this myth: http://www.freedomcast.com/h1b/NIVSolution2006.pdf.
Another myth is that H-1b visas fill hard to find jobs. That may be true in select occupations, however the vast majority of H-1b visas fill jobs where there are not shortages of skilled labor, just shortages of cheap labor. These numbers suggest otherwise:
Total LCA Applications in 2005Occupation...............................Applications.......Percent of Total (Rounded)
Programmer.........................................279,719.....................46%
Non-Programmer IT Jobs.................132,627.....................22%
Non-IT Jobs.........................................199,466.....................33%
The reason I focus on Programmer jobs is because the vast majority of applications is for these jobs - as seen above. Many people ask why the Programmers Guild seems to just focus on this issue, well now you know. 68% of all H-1b visa applications are for IT-related positions so it is only natural that we take a lead on this issue.
One solution to this problem, since so many companies are looking for cheap labor as opposed to highly skilled labor, is to set the a minimum wage at the average. If the H-1b becomes a visa designed to deliver quality workers as opposed to a large number of low paid workers it will meet less opposition. In addition to fair pay for the workers on H-1b visas, we must prevent American workers from being displaced. Although my other paper details such a method, there are many factors to consider.
Some top hitters include
... Read the actual
paper ...
If the goal of the H-1b program is to replace American workers and provide corporations with exploitable and cheap labor, then it is working just fine. If the goal is to provide corporations with truly high skilled labor, then it is falling short. Our proposals work towards that goal and should be supported by any legitimate company with a legitimate need. Those opposing us are most likely abusers of the system.
Here was the query run so everyone knows this is legit and open. FYI Software Engineer positions were not a part of this result set. Companies claim they need "software engineers" - so why are over 2/3 of the IT jobs just for "PROGRAMMERS" ???
select sum(nbr_immigrants) total, truncate(avg(wage_rate_1),2) AveragePayfrom lcawhere rate_per_1 = 'Year'and Approval_Status = 'Certified'and job_code like ('03%')and ucase(job_title) like ('%PROGRAMMER%')Order by total;
Replacing Harris Miller as "Enemy #1" of IT workers at the ITAA, an IT industry association intent on harming IT workers through labor arbitrage, is Phillip Bond. He is a Bush insider and and just quit his job as head of the Office of Technology Policy (OTP) at the Commerce Department.
This is truly troublesome. It puts into question the independence of the OTP. This is clearly an unholy marriage between industry and government. The OTP should distance itself from the ITAA and this sad and irresponsible move.
Literally days before announcing a move to the ITAA Bond spoke on behalf of the government for their board of directors as reported here:
http://www.informationweek.com/showArticle.jhtml;jsessionid=PLCWCZAFT3ZB2QSNDLRSKH0CJUNN2JVN?articleID=22101653.
All I can say is that Bush Administration officials have been a sad a cruel joke once again. But is anyone really surprised when a Bush insider becomes an industry lobbyist? The OTP by the way is the same organization claiming millions of IT jobs would be created, but then had to eat their words when we actually lost jobs. They have always had close ties to industry and no ties to IT professionals. Amazing - they claim to want to create jobs but not once have they spoken to labor groups about labor specific issues. Of course they always find time to meet with industry lobby groups.
Shame on them all! This government is suppose to be of and for the people. Instead, the OTP represents a sellout of our national interests. As Homer Simpson would say: BOOOOOOOH!!!
The only question now is who's image to place on my dart board now. Does Harris Miller come down? Not just yet. I'm still waiting to see his next move.
In one of our most agressive moves to combat discrimination, the Programmers Guild has today filed over 300 complaints with the US Department of Justice for discriminatory ads. FYI I am on the board of directors of the non-profit
Programmers Guild. Here is what ComputerWorld has to say about the complaints:
http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9001285June 19, 2006
(Computerworld) -- The Programmers Guild is filing a stack of complaints with the U.S. Department of Justice against some 300 IT employers it says are discriminating against U.S. citizens and permanent residents by placing advertisements that specifically seek "H-1B only" visa holders or workers who have student or L-1 visas.
John Miano, founder of the Summit, N.J.-based Programmers Guild, said today that he has collected some 1,500 IT job advertisements in the past six weeks from a variety of online jobs boards that express preference for hiring visa holders. Miano said the practice is widespread because "for the most part, there isn't much enforcement going on. So we are trying to do what we can do to bring private enforcement against these employers."
Miano said H-1B workers are in demand because "they are cheap and they make good slave labor." The guild has filed about 100 complaints with the DOJ's Office of Special Counsel for Immigration-Related Discrimination, and it plans to file another 200.
It's not to difficult to find IT job advertisements that seek specific skills, and H-1B opponents have long circulated examples of these advertisements on mailing lists.
For instance, in a search on the job board run by Dice Inc., iGate Mastech, a Pittsburgh-based IT staffing agency with about 1,000 employees, has an advertisement for eight Java developers with three to five years of Java development experience. The ad says: "Only looking for H-1B visas and should be willing to transfer."
Paper in progress - Economists on outsourcing software jobs - part-1/draft-1
I am working on a paper regarding the fathers of economics and what their views would be on offshore outsourcing and related issues impacting software professionals. Because I am a software professional and amateur economist a good way to prepare this paper is to get feedback during the construction of it.
The paper's goal is to tie the modern day with the works of Adam Smith, John Stuart Mill, and David Ricardo. The target audience are other software professionals with no background in economics. Concepts should be at a level that people without an economics or finance degree can still understand.
Fortunately, each of these authors are dead - and has been dead more than 70 years. Well, fortunately for us and probably not them. Because of this, their books are open source and can be read freely online as can books from other economists past:
http://www.econlib.org/index.html.
In addition to reading literature, I will be watching the Adam Smith DVD which should arrive shortly. That should put me on par with all the economics students who were drinking and partying when they should have been studying.
I need your help, if you are so inclined. Simply post comments as this topic builds.
So in short, be nice. Call me out on something if I am wrong or if you believe me to be wrong. And make suggestions on how to advance the topic. When complete, I think software professionals should have a better understanding of offshore outsourcing and a respect for thinkers of the past.
Adam Smith, John Stuart Mill, and David Ricardo on the Software Profession (A work in progress) Part 1, Draft 1
By Roy Lawson
If some of the most revered economists could speak, we can only wonder what they would say about issues facing software professionals today. This article examines the writings of Adam Smith, John Stuart Mill, and David Ricardo. Although electronic based machines, software, and modern day communication technologies were not invented during the lives of these men, their theories are still applicable today. Most software professionals don't have a background in economics; this article is intended to give them a background on the subject and an understanding of how it applies to themselves.
Traditionally a commodity describes unprocessed goods that can be traded or sold such as grain, metals, and livestock. In corporations today you will often hear managers refer to software developers as a "commodity". This term is not meant to have an endearing connotation and is in fact used to describe a service based occupation that corporations wish to trade freely on the global market. These individuals don't make a distinction between the trade of cattle and the trade of human services, nor do they take interest in the social implications of such a concept. There is an indifference to nationalistic interests and a priority given to short term drivers of the market economy.
Software is a significant aspect of our modern day economy and is intended to make corporations more productive. Productivity enables workers to focus on more valuable endeavors, which is directly responsible for increased profits. Productivity can also be gained through lower labor costs. Modern day communications such as the Internet enable companies to move software production to regions where labor costs are lower. This shift can increase productivity because the same output can be gained at a much lower cost.
Moving software development and related service jobs to lower cost regions is known as arbitrage, or the practice of taking advantage of the state of imbalance between two markets.[3]
As a modern day example of arbitrage it is often more affordable for companies to outsource jobs to Indian companies where there is a large supply of educated workers who are able to live and produce the same services at a fraction of the cost. This is achieved through a variety of market imbalances. First, India is a less developed economy with a large population of low-skilled producers. The vast supply of workers at the bottom of the class hierarchy enable those at the top, such as software developers, to have a much lower cost of living than their counterparts in the United States. Thus their cost to produce the same amount of output is much lower. In this case, success in global trade is achieved artificially by means of mass poverty.
Other market disparities also exist in India such as a currency regime that is pegged to a basket of other currencies, meaning it is not traded on the open market as is the custom of more developed nations. Because of this the growth in the Indian currency regime will not be the same as the growth in the Indian economy. This creates an imbalance between other markets and an opportunity for arbitrage to exist.
Another form of arbitrage in American labor markets include the importation of workers from other countries on certain guest worker visa programs. These workers are often exploited because of their immigration status; company sponsorship is required for immigration purposes so their ability to work freely in the open market is restricted. Because of such restrictions, these workers produce the same product for lower salaries and will work longer hours in what amounts to a modern day form of indentured servitude. Should the workers request higher salaries or more advantageous working conditions the company may terminate not only their employment but their right to live and work in the United States. This unfair advantage makes many foreign guest workers more productive (by means of disparity) and thus a natural choice for employment over indigenous workers.
All of the conditions described are hardly new concepts but there are most certainly some modern day twists when compared with the times of our economic forefathers. In 1776 Adam Smith published An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations.[1] One obvious answer to global trade disparities is of course trade restrictions. According to Smith creating a "monopoly of the home market" through high duties or absolute prohibitions secures the domestic industry employed in the protected market which "gives greater encouragement to that particular species of industry which enjoys it, and frequently turns towards that employment a greater share of both the labour and stock of the society than would otherwise have gone to it."
Despite the obvious benefits of such home market protections to a specific industry, Smith cannot be certain that it is beneficial to the whole of society. He goes on to say that "to give the monopoly of the home-market to the produce of domestic industry, in any particular art or manufacture, is in some measure to direct private people in what manner they ought to employ their capitals, and must, in almost all cases, be either a useless or hurtful regulation."
What we learn from Smith is that in general trade restrictions are not always a good thing, but when Smith refers to such protections he refers to trade of true commodities such as cattle and corn. During his time it was not conceivable that large portions of the skilled labor performed in one nation could be performed in the other by means of technology. Another difference between the economy as Smith knew it and today is that the economies Smith studied throughout Europe were either engaged largely in agricultural or industrial endeavors; high-tech services of today are a relatively new phenomenon.
One could argue that the world as Adam Smith knew it (Europe) was actually flatter than the world as we know it today, to borrow from Thomas Friedman. The economies throughout Europe were much more similar to each other than the economies of India and China when compared to more mature economies like the United States and Japan. These differences have an enormous impact on domestic labor markets.
Smith did address the inequalities of labor and pointed out three major sources. These inequalities include restraining competition, increasing competition beyond what it naturally would be, and finally obstructing the free movement of labor from employer to employer and place to place.
The software occupations are not restrictive at all; there are few unions, no apprenticeships, and no professional licensing requirements as seen in professions such as law, finance, and health care occupations. Generally, employers prefer a four year degree and some form of certification from software professionals. Given the advanced knowledge required to practice in the profession this seems reasonable.
A clear inequality found in the United States is increasing competition beyond what it naturally would be. This can be seen in the importation of foreign labor intended to artificially increase the supply of workers in software occupations. An example of this is the authorization of foreign guest workers via the H-1b visa. According to the U.S. Department of Labor in 2002 American companies reduced employment in the software occupations by 139,000 while increasing foreign guest workers by 110,713 workers in the same occupations.[2]
As previously stated, these foreign guest workers also face obstructed movement from employer to employer; immigration policy requires that employers sponsor them and they are restricted from changing employers. Doing so can reset any pending immigration requests such as permanent residence. A pause in employment may also require the worker to leave the country, creating an unnatural tie between employee and employer. This satisfies the third inequality identified by Smith.
Smith plainly separated the trade of goods and labor; he recognized that "the only property which every man has is his own labour, is it is the original foundation of all other property, so it is the most sacred and inviolable." Smith goes on to say that hindering man from practicing their trade is "a plain violation of this most sacred property." Smith would no doubt take offense to the results of outsourcing service related jobs to foreign nations for the sole purpose of labor arbitrage. This is not a desirable result of trade relationships as described by Smith.
So are software developers commodities? No, and absolutely no. A more probable technology based commodity may be the trade of bandwidth; our current networks have a limited capacity, there is no concentration of supply or demand, and pricing is both volatile and indexed. This is simply not the case with software services, although most companies would love for it to be so. Could software products and not the producers themselves be commodities? Under some circumstances and debatable use of the word, it is possible. An example of this may be open source software or commercial off the shelf software (COTS), however even this is quite a loose interpretation of the word.
The term "commodity" as applied towards software professionals is used incorrectly by technology companies to define jobs which are targets of outsourcing to a foreign market. Semantics aside, the reasons for outsourcing these jobs (lower wages) are, as established by Adam Smith, based upon unfair trade conditions that allow companies to take advantage of the disparities between U.S. and foreign markets. Trade protections should exist to remedy disparities but not to the point of creating a "monopoly of the home market." Ideally, Adam Smith would prefer that countries correct disparities but in the interim he would not fault a nation for protecting their national interests through duties designed to correct such disparities.
David Ricardo was drawn into economics after reading The Wealth of Nations. He greatly expanded upon Smith's works and developed the theory of Comparative Advantage in Principles of Political Economy which was published in 1817. His theory is often used to justify trends such as outsourcing. To be sure, outsourcing is not inherently a bad thing unless the motivations are based upon unfair trade practices; this can currently be demonstrated with the nations of India and China.
Part two...Comparative Advantage...
Shortages of labor...
John Stuart Mill...
The flyer I posted in a prior blog created what I call a fake controversy in Virginia politics. Mind you, I did not create the flyer. Miller campaign staff claim that the flyer is anti-Semitic because of the "hooked nose", references to him as the anti-Christ of outsourcing, and because he has money hanging out of his pockets.
I believe that each point made by the campaign is utter nonsense.
First, the cartoonist who drew the original graphics TRACED a picture of Harris Miller - so if he has a hooked nose of course the final result will have a hooked nose. I did research, and this is in fact a stereotype (I was not aware of this stereotypes so research was required). However given that the image was traced I don't think that was the cartoonists intent.
Second, an Information Week article referenced many of OUR ACTIVISTS in regards to the characterization of Miller being the "anti-Christ of outsourcing". I have never studied pictures of Harris Miller and given his surname of "Miller" which is of English origins (according to geneology.com) we would have no reason to think Harris Miller was Jewish. Even if he were, it has no impact regarding our views of him. We refer to him as the "Anti-Christ of Outsourcing" because he is a terrible human being with a stated goal of moving American jobs overseas. We don't hate him because of his ethnicity or religion, but because he is an ass.
Third, Harris Miller is rich. He has corporate money coming in from the largest tech companies across America. As president of the ITAA he made tons of money lobbying for the outsourcing of American jobs. He is also self-funding his campaign by nearly $1,000,000. Simply put, he has sold out American workers to make a quick buck.
The bottom line is that Harris Miller is at the bottom of the barrell when it comes to judging a person's character. His actions against American IT workers are simply not forgiveable. And the fact that he is running as a Democrat of all things is laughable.
Miller played the race card, and lost.
According to an AP
article:
The flier, drawn in comic-book cartoon style, depicts Miller with a grotesquely hooked nose and cash overflowing from his suit pockets as he orders an underling to find ways to export U.S. jobs overseas. The flier refers to Miller as the "anti-Christ of outsourcing.''Miller called it "despicable.'' "One of the things I hoped we would keep out of this campaign, because it has nothing to do with the campaign, is my religion and my background,'' Miller said. Webb said the flier was not intended to disparage Miller's religion or heritage and apologized if it was perceived that way.
"I would not in any way look at that and say that it was anti-Semitic. Harris is the one who's played the race card in this campaign by distorting my views on affirmative action,'' said Webb, a Republican-turned-Democrat and best-selling author. Because Miller is so offended by the comic, I have decided to edit it - removing things he may find offensive to his religion.
I will not take out the money coming from his pockets because that is factually true. I am using his actual image in each slide from actual Harris Miller footage - notice the final image. Harris likes to point out that he is a Democrat every chance he gets - maybe he is on to something. Or is he just an ass?
This article on CounterPunch.com is so good I am going to submit in the entirety and allow you to be the judge...
Outsourcing Smarts
The Death of US Engineering
By PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS
The May payroll jobs report released June 2 by the Bureau of Labor Statistics confirms the jobs pattern for the 21st century US economy: employment growth is limited to domestic services.
In May the economy created only 67,000 private sector jobs. Job estimates for the previous two months were reduced by 37,000.
The new jobs are as follows: professional and business services, 27,000; education and health services, 41,000; waitresses and bartenders, 10,000. Manufacturing lost 14,000 jobs.
Total hours worked in the private sector declined in May. Manufacturing hours worked are 6.6 percent less than when the recovery began four and one-half years ago.
American economists and policymakers are in denial about the effect of jobs offshoring on US employment. Corporate lobbyists have purchased fraudulent studies from economists that claim offshoring results in more US employment rather than less. The same lobbyists have spread disinformation that the US does not graduate enough engineers and that they must import foreigners on work visas. Lobbyists are currently pushing, as part of the immigration bill, an expansion in annual H-1B work visas from 65,000 to 115,000.
The alleged "shortage" of US engineering graduates is inconsistent with reports from Duke University that 30 to 40 percent of students in its master's of engineering management program accept jobs outside the profession. About one-third of engineering graduates from MIT go into careers outside their field. Job outsourcing and work visas for foreign engineers are reducing career opportunities for American engineering graduates and, also, reducing salary scales.
When employers allege a shortage of engineers, they mean that there is a shortage of American graduates who will work for the low salaries that foreigners will accept. Americans are simply being forced out of the engineering professions by jobs outsourcing and the importation of foreigners on work visas. Corporate lobbyists and their hired economists are destroying the American engineering professions.
American engineering is also under pressure because corporations have moved manufacturing offshore. Design, research and development are now following manufacturing offshore. A country that doesn't make things doesn't need engineers and designers. Corporations that have moved manufacturing offshore fund R&D in the countries where their plants have been relocated.
Engineering curriculums are demanding. The rewards to the effort are being squeezed out by jobs offshoring and work visas. If the current policy continues of substituting foreign engineers for American engineers, the profession will die in the US.
Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan administration. He was Associate Editor of the Wall Street Journal editorial page and Contributing Editor of National Review. He is coauthor of
The Tyranny of Good Intentions.He can be reached at:
paulcraigroberts@yahoo.com
Something nice about Harris Miller
The primaries for the Senate campaign in Virginia are heating up - and I might be guilty of throwing fuel on the fire. For those living in a cave, the race is between IT Lobbyist Harris "The Job Killer" Miller and pro-labor war hero Jim Webb. So you caught me, I am biased.
Some bloggers are complaining about the tone of this election and the nasty things going around about Harris Miller in blogs. Miller's outsourcing past has ignited a spark, and we showed up with a mission of defeating one of the most anti-labor candidates in the United States today. Uninvited of course. Did I say he is running as a Democrat? Ouch, the AFL-CIO is not happy.
Well, some people have a point. We are very negative on Miller. So I thought I would take this opportunity to tell you what he is good at.
Harris Miller is an excellent lobbyist. He has been able to present negative data and facts in a more positive light. He has made change in Washington throughout his career, and I don't think he had to twist any arms. It is amazing what he has been able to accomplish with the millions of dollars made available to the ITAA by technology companies. If I were a multinational corporation I'd have his number on speed-dial.
In regards to our own efforts opposing the ITAA, I am impressed at how Miller was able to convince Congress that our views just aren't relevant. And even if they are, "who is going to help your campaign Mr. Congressman more - a bunch of IT workers or Bill Gates?"
In addition to kicking his opposition when we were down and unemployment was high, he is able to change even our own message. For example, we say "outsourcing American jobs is bad" and he tells people our message is "outsourcing should be banned". Maybe it is our fault for not forming a marketable message - if only we had the money to spend in PR that the ITAA had. The truth is that we aren't after a ban on outsourcing - just a level playing field. Not that I am making excuses mind you, Harris Miller has beat us fair and square.
And when I say "us" I mean anyone in a profession who may have their job outsourced or replaced by low cost foreign workers at home. Well done Harris Miller. You got us good. Something to write Thomas Friedman about - you two would make great friends BTW. So much in common.
Now what I find even more amazing is that Miller was able to make high powered connections amongst other Democrats in Virginia - "friends" even. Enough "friends" that when he announced his intention to seek the US Senate, he got a wink and nod. It never occured to party leadership in Virginia that this man is not liked one bit by labor proponents. It is almost as if they didn't see these attacks coming - like they thought other Democrats would just remain silent. Or maybe Miller had them fooled. Either way, well played.
No, that paragraph is a compliment. With trickery like that Miller can apply these skills and make wealthy men even wealthier. Hell, if he were able to cough up $500,000 for his own campaign he probably isn't too bad for himself either.
In short, Miller is able to take money and his fast talk, and convert it into favor from our government. He is a great investment if you are a company and are unable to gain favor on the merits of what you are asking for. Life isn't fair - Miller realizes that.
In the words of a rap artist I heard on the radio (or was it Bill Maher?) "Don't hate the player, hate the game."
My only question is will Harris Miller go back to the ITAA after he loses the primaries after they made him compromise his values and donate to Republican candidates? Hmmm, we can only imagine. I think the ITAA would be a fool if they didn't hire Miller back. Look, I don't even know this new guy at the ITAA. When he says "not enough engineers, must raise the H-1b cap" people just roll their eyes. Miller was able to do so much better than him - when he misled, people believed him. That skill is priceless - especially as a lobbyist.
I think he will be back on his feet and outsourcing American jobs in no time. Harris Miller, if you do a speaking tour please invite me!!! Bill Clinton and Bob Dole speak at the same events, you know. I'm just saying, it could work. We could invite Jim Webb, but he may be busy this time next year.
-R. Lawson
Shortage of Engineering and IT Graduates???
The tech industry claims that they are desperately short of engineering college grads. This chart says it all - engineering and CS degree production is on the rise.
So what is going down? Enrollments. One would expect the trend depicted to reverse in the near future because of lower enrollments in recent years. The question is why would college students stop pursuing engineering and computer sciences?
Simple. The career is in jeapardy from outsourcing and the insourcing of cheap replacement workers.
In addition to that, the cost of attaining a four year degree is sky-rocketing. The interest rates for subsidized loans are also at record rates - the highest since Carter was President. Starting this fall, rates will jump up to 7%. To give you an idea of how high that is, three years ago I locked in at 2.2% for my graduate degree.
If this government wants to save the IT and Engineering occupations they had better act quick. Their pro-outsourcing and pro-labor-insourcing positions are taking a toll on our occupation. The government acting to make college even less affordable is simply not forgivable. These politicians use education as their battle cry every damned time they are up for election. So why is an education in American too expensive for many people to pursue?
All I can say is follow the link. This is the best campaign flyer I have ever seen and summarizes Harris Miller being the scum-lobbyist that he is. If you live in Norther Virginia print it out and give it to your friends. And for Pete's sake,
VOTE IN THE DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY!!!
Supporting Jim Webb for US Senate
I am reposting a letter to activists and academics that I sent out today encouraging them to support Jim Webb for the US Senate in Northern Virginia. If you would like to participate, please email me at ###NOSPAM###roy@freedomcast.com###NOSPAM### so that I can get the details out to you. Remove the extra characters from the email address of course.Hello fellow activists and distinguised leaders in academia,
It isn't often that we get this chance to defeat ITAA lobbyist Harris Miller in such a direct way. The next two weeks is our opportunity to do just that - to send an anti-worker industry lobbyist home with his tail between his legs. Please help us in making calls to Virginia Democrats in support of Jim Webb so that we can defeat our long-time opponent!
I can't think of a single person getting this email who supports Harris Miller - he is or course a direct threat to our profession. But in addition to opposing Harris Miller, I want to give you a reason to support Jim Webb. The reason I am personally supporting Jim Webb is because he has promised to be a leader in the fight against outsourcing American jobs and the related issue of insourcing. In addition to that he is a genuine American hero who served as a U.S. Marine in the Vietnam war. Jim Webb later served as the Secretary of the Navy and went on to write a novel which became a blockbuster film starring Tommy Lee Jones and Samuel L. Jackson - "Rules of Engagement". Did I mention he is opposed to outsourcing American jobs?
The choice is simple - a war hero opposed to outsourcing American jobs or an industry lobbyist who has turned outsourcing our jobs into a career. Unfortunately the industry lobbyist has a war-chest of money and he is spending big time in attack ads. The threat is real and I am counting on a former Marine to neutralize it.
Jim Webb is also counting on us, so let's show him and the Democratic party that technology professionals, activists, and academia are able to mobilize and become a respected force in politics today. Our reputation and ability to be taken seriously by politicians depends on your actions NOW, and in this case there is no later. Send Congress a message that we matter and that our profession should be taken seriously! If we are able to mobilize and impact this campaign, our message will be heard loud and clear.
Activists -- Please forward the email pasted below which was sent to us from the Field Director of the Webb campaign, and is intended to be sent to all American technology professionals. We need your help in getting the word out! We have talked the talk now let's walk the walk!!!
Best Regards,
Roy Lawson
