Order Code 97-746
Foreign Science and Engineering
Presence in U.S. Institutions
and the Labor Force
Updated January 12, 2007
Christine M. Matthews
Specialist in Science and Technology Policy
Resources, Science, and Industry Division

---

Foreign Science and Engineering Presence in U.S.
Institutions and the Labor Force
Summary
The increased presence of foreign students in graduate science and engineering
programs and in the scientific workforce has been and continues to be of concern to
some in the scientific community. Enrollment of U.S. citizens in graduate science
and engineering programs has not kept pace with that of foreign students in those
programs. In addition to the number of foreign students in graduate science and
engineering programs, a significant number of university faculty in the scientific
disciplines are foreign, and foreign doctorates are employed in large numbers by
industry.
Few will dispute that U.S. universities and industry have chosen foreign talent
to fill many positions. Foreign scientists and engineers serve the needs of industry
at the doctorate level and also have been found to serve in major roles at the masters
level. Not surprisingly, there are charges that U.S. workers are adversely affected by
the entry of foreign scientists and engineers, who reportedly accept lower wages than
U.S. citizens would accept in order to enter or remain in the United States. These
arguments occur in the context of a job market in which there is a reported imbalance
between supply and demand for scientists and engineers in certain fields. The
National Science Foundation (NSF) reports that between 1998 and 2008,
employment in science and engineering fields will increase at more than four times
the rate for all other occupations. In addition, approximately 80% of the increase in
science and engineering will be in computer-related positions.
NSF data reveal that in 2004, the foreign student population earned
approximately 32.1% of the doctorate degrees in the sciences and approximately
61.3% of the doctorate degrees in engineering. In 2004, foreign students on
temporary resident visas earned 28.4% of the doctorates in the sciences, and 57.2%
of the doctorates in engineering. The participation rates in 2003 were 27.4% and
55.3%, respectively. In 2004, permanent resident status students earned 3.7% of the
doctorates in the sciences and 4.2% of the doctorates in engineering, a decrease from
the 2003 levels of 4.2% and 5%, respectively. Trend data for science and engineering
degrees for the years 1995-2004 reveal that of the non-U.S. citizen population,
temporary resident status students consistently have earned the majority of the
doctorate degrees.
Many in the scientific community maintain that in order to compete with
countries that are rapidly expanding their scientific and technological capabilities, the
country needs to bring to the United States those whose skills will benefit society and
will enable us to compete in the new-technology based global economy. However,
the academic community is concerned that the more stringent visa requirements for
foreign students may have a continued impact on enrollments in colleges and
universities. There are those who believe that the underlying problems of foreign
students in graduate science and engineering programs is not necessarily that there
are too many foreign-born students, but that there are not enough U.S. students
pursuing scientific and technical disciplines. This report will be updated periodically.

---

Contents

Foreign Students in U.S. Institutions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Participation Rates in Science and Engineering . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Support of Foreign Students in Graduate School . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Perceived Benefits and Problems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Foreign Scientists and Engineers in the U.S. Labor Force . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Policy Implications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
List of Figures
Figure 1. Doctorate Degrees: U.S. and Non-U.S. Citizens, 2004 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Figure 2. Non-U.S. Citizens Awarded Doctorates in Science and Engineering
by Country or Citizenship, 2004 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
List of Tables
Table 1. Science Doctorates: Non-U.S. Citizens — Temporary and
Permanent Residents as a Percentage of Total Awards, 1995-2004 . . . . . . . 7
Table 2. Engineering Doctorates: Non-U.S. Citizens — Temporary and
Permanent Residents as a Percentage of Total Awards, 1995-2004 . . . . . . . 8
Table 3. Primary Sources of Financial Support for Doctorate Recipients,
2005 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Table 4. H-1B Petitions Approved by Select Occupation Group, Fiscal Year
2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

---

Foreign Science and Engineering Presence
in U.S. Institutions and the Labor Force
The increased presence of foreign students in graduate science and engineering
programs and in the scientific workforce has been and continues to be of concern to
some in the scientific community.1 Enrollment of U.S. citizens in graduate science
and engineering programs has not kept pace with that of foreign students in those
programs. In addition to the number of foreign students in graduate science and
engineering programs, a significant number of university faculty in the scientific
disciplines are foreign, and foreign doctorates are employed in large numbers by
industry.
Those in the scientific community, arguing for ceilings on admissions for
immigrants, maintain that foreign students use U.S. graduate education programs as
stepping stones to immigration through sponsorships for permanent residence.2
Approximately 56% of foreign doctorate degree earners on temporary visas remain
in the United States, with many eventually becoming citizens.3 Data on adjustments
from temporary visas to permanent status increased by 68% from 347,416 in 2003
to 583,921 in 2004.4 It is estimated that by 2010, more than 50% of all employment-
based preference workers would adjust their temporary status to permanent status.
1This report excludes the discussion of foreign students entering the medical profession. For
a general discussion of foreign students in the United States in all disciplines, see for
example, CRS Report RL31146, Foreign Students in the United States: Policies and
Legislation, by Chad C. Haddel.
2An employer may sponsor a foreign scientist or engineer for permanent residence, if they
meet terms established by the Immigration and Nationality Act.
3Foreign students planning to remain in the United States following graduation vary by field
and discipline as well as by country. For all science and engineering fields, the stay rate is
56%; for physical sciences, 64%; life sciences, 63%; mathematics, 57%; computer sciences,
63%; and agricultural sciences, 38%. Stay rates are not static, and various estimates appear
in the literature. Differences are observed over a period of time in the main country of
origin for foreign scientists and engineers. (It is estimated that Chinese and Indian students
who choose to remain in the United States following their studies range from 66% to 92%
and 77% to 88% respectively). The stay rates of foreign students have an impact on both the
U.S. economy and the supply of scientific personnel in the United States and on the
economies of the home countries of the foreign students. National Science Foundation,
Science and Engineering Indicators 2004, Volume I, NSB04-01, Arlington, VA, January 15,
2004, pp. 3-38 - 3-39.
4 Department of Homeland Security, Office of Immigration Statistics Management
Directorate, U.S. Legal Permanent Residents: 2004, Nancy F. Rytina, June 2005, p. 3.

---

CRS-2
Few will dispute that U.S. universities and industry have chosen foreign talent
to fill many positions.5 Foreign scientists and engineers serve the needs of industry
at the doctorate level and also have been found to serve in major roles at the masters
level.6 Not surprisingly, there are charges that U.S. workers are adversely affected
by the entry of foreign scientists and engineers, who reportedly accept lower wages
than U.S. citizens would accept in order to enter or remain in the United States.7
These arguments occur in the context of a debate on projections and potential
imbalances in certain scientific and technical disciplines.8 The U.S. Bureau of Labor
Statistics reports that between the years 2000 and 2010, employment in science and
engineering fields will increase at a faster rate than all other occupations. The
growth rate will result, primarily, from growth in mathematics and computer-related
occupations.9
Much attention in the scientific community has focused on the H-1B temporary
admissions program.10 A report of the National Science Foundation (NSF) during the
5 It is estimated that in colleges and universities, foreign-born doctorate degree holders
account for approximately 33% of the full-time faculty in computer sciences, 26% in
engineering, 33% in mathematics, and 22% in the physical sciences. At the postdoctoral
level, the participation of foreign doctorate holders is 56% in engineering, 50% in
mathematics, and 42% in physical sciences. Data show that since 1990, approximately 50%
of the U.S. Nobel laureates in the scientific and technical disciplines were foreign-born.
Science and Engineering Indicators 2004, Volume 2, Appendix Table 5-25.
6 See for example The National Academies, Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public
Policy, Policy Implications of International Graduate Students and Postdoctoral Scholars
in the United States, Washington, DC, May 2005, pp.17-65, and Washington Fax, “Foreign
Postdocs, Other Foreign Scientists Vital to NIH Intramural Research Workforce,” October
20, 2004, [http://www.washingtonfax.com/pl/2004/20041020.html].
7 Center for Immigration Studies, Davis, Donald R. and David E. Weinstein, United States
Technological Superiority and the Losses From Migration, February 2005, 7 pp.
8 The National Academy of Sciences, Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public
Policy, Rising Above the Gathering Storm, Washington, 2005, pp. 3-1 - 3-31, Monastersky,
Richard, “Is There a Science Crisis? Maybe Not,” The Chronicle of Higher Education, v.
50, July 9, 2004, p. A10, and Jackson, Shirley Ann, Envisioning a 21st Century Science and
Engineering Workforce for the United States, Report to the Government-University-Industry
Research Roundtable, Washington, DC, 2003, 18 pp.
9 Hecker, Daniel E., “Occupational Employment Projections to 2012,” Monthly Labor
Review, February 2004, pp. 80-105.
10The H-1B visa category was established by the Immigration Act of 1990. The Immigration
Act and the American Competitiveness and Workforce Improvement Act of 1998 regulate
H-1B policy and guide H-1B procedures. The H-1B temporary visa category allows the
foreign professional to work in the United States in specialty occupations for a period up to
six years (generally in three-year increments). Typically the specialty occupation includes
positions such as scientists, engineers, teachers, computer programmers, medical doctors,
and physical therapists. The application for H-1B status must be filed by an employer; an
individual cannot obtain an H-1B visa on his or her own. Employers of H-1B workers are
required to meet certain labor conditions, including paying comparable wages. The
requirements are designed to ensure that U.S. workers are not negatively impacted by
(continued...)

---

CRS-3
late 1980s claiming a nationwide shortage of scientists and engineers may have
contributed to the decision by Congress to expand the skilled-labor preference system
contained in the Immigration Act of 1990.11 The 1990 legislation more than doubled
employment-based immigration, including scientists and engineers entering under the
H-1B visa category. The act raised the numerical limits or ceilings on permanent,
employment-based admissions, from 54,000 to 140,000 annually.12 In addition, the
legislation ascribed high priority to the entry of selected skilled and professional
workers, and simplified admissions procedures for foreign nationals seeking to
temporarily work, study, or conduct business in the United States.
On October 17, 2000, the American Competitiveness in the Twenty-First
Century Act of 2000 was signed into law (P.L. 106-313), significantly changing the
H-1B program and the employment-based immigration program. The legislation
raised the annual number of H-1B visas to 195,000 for FY2001, FY2002, and
FY2003, and returned to 65,000 in FY2004. It excluded from the new ceiling all H-
1B nonimmigrants who are employed by institutions of higher education and
nonprofit or governmental research organizations. The law authorized additional H-
1B visas for FY1999 to offset the visas inadvertently approved for the year that
exceeded the cap.13 In addition, the law increased the fees employers paid for each
petition for nonimmigrant status — from $500 to $1,000 per petition.14 A portion of
the fees are made available to the NSF for the development of private-public
partnerships in K-12 education, the expansion of computer science, engineering, and
mathematics scholarships, and the establishment of demonstration programs or
(...continued)
nonimmigrant workers. For expanded discussion of the H-1B visa see CRS Report
RL30498, Immigration: Legislative Issues on Nonimmigrant Professional Speciality (H-1B)
Workers, by Ruth Ellen Wasem, and Usdansky, Margaret L. and Thomas J. Espenshade, The
H-1B Visa Debate in Historical Perspective: The Evolution of U.S. Policy Toward Foreign-
Born Workers, Working Paper No. 11, The Center for Comparative Immigration Studies,
University of California-San Diego, May 10, 2000, 11pp.
11The shortage of technical workers that was projected and used to justify the significant
increase in employment-based immigration authorized by the 1990 Immigration Act never
materialized. The projections were determined to be erroneous because of flawed data and
faulty methodology. Mervis, Jeffrey, “Congress Presses Probe Into NSF Prediction of
Scientist Shortage,” The Scientist, v. 5, October 28, 1991, pp. 1, 6-7.
12Immigration to the United States occurs in three ways: (1) legal, including family- and
employment-based immigration; (2) humanitarian, which includes refugees and/or asylum
seekers; and (3) illegal.
13 The then Immigration and Naturalization Service acknowledged that in the fall of 1999,
problems with the computerized tracking system lead to the approval of between 21,888 and
23,385 more H-1B visas allowable for FY1999. See for example General Accounting
Office, H-1B Foreign Workers: Better Controls Needed to Help Employers and Protect
Workers, GAO/HEHS-00-157, Washington, DC, September 2000, pp. 28-29.
14 The law expanded the list of employers who are exempt from paying the fee. For
expanded discussion of the H-1B specialty worker see General Accounting Office, Grants
from H-1B Visa Fees Meet Specific Workforce Needs, But At Varying Skill Levels, GAO-02-
881, Washington, DC, September 2002, 78 pp.

---

CRS-4
projects that provide technical skills training for U.S. workers, both employed and
unemployed.15
Signed into law on December 8, 2004, P. L. 108-447, The Consolidated
Appropriations Act, 2005, reauthorized H-1B funding.16 The fee employers pay for
each petition was raised from $1,000 to $1,500 per petition. For employers with less
than 25 full-time equivalent employees, the fee was set at $750 per petition. Also, the
legislation created an additional 20,000 H-1B visas for FY2005, for those who had
earned a masters degree or higher from a U.S. institution of higher education.17
The scientific community has been divided over proposals to impose stricter
immigration limits on people with scientific and technical skills. Attempts to settle
upon the balance between the needs for a highly skilled scientific and technical
workforce, and the need to protect and ensure job opportunities, salaries, and working
conditions of U.S. scientific personnel, will continue to be debated. This paper
addresses these issues.
Foreign Students in U.S. Institutions
The number of non-U.S. citizens enrolling in U.S. colleges and universities
slowed following the September 11th terrorist attacks.18 The slowing of enrollments
has been attributed to, among other things, the tightening of U.S. visa policies and
increased global competition for graduates in the scientific and technical disciplines
from countries such as China, India, and Canada.19 However, a 2006 report of the
15 In addition, the Department of Labor received fees for job training, scholarships, and
grants. The fees had sunset on October 1, 2003.
16 Title IV, Subtitle B: H-1B Visa Reform.
17 The first 20,000 H-1B beneficiaries with an earned master’s degree or higher from a U.S.
institution are exempt from the annual congressional mandated H-1B visa cap of 65,000.
In addition, the legislation modified the formula for allocating fees from the H-1B
Nonimmigrant Petitioner Account. See U.S. Department of Homeland Security, U.S.
Citizenship and Immigration Services, Press Release, “USCIS to Implement H-1B Visa
Reform Act of 2004,” December 9, 2004, 2pp. Citizenship and Immigration Services began
taking applications for the 20,000 H-1B visa workers with advanced degrees on May 12, two
months behind schedule. The USCIS stated that the delay in implementation of the
expanded H-1B visa program resulted from a need for clarification and interpretation of the
law. NOTE: The USCIS exceeded the 65,000 cap on H-1B visas by approving 10,000 more
petitions for visas than were authorized by Congress.
18 See for example Jaschik, Scott, “International Recovery,” Inside Higher Ed, November
13, 2006, [http://insidehighered.com/news/2006/11/13/intl], McCormack, Eugene, “Foreign
Applications to Graduate Schools Rise After 2-Year Drop,” The Chronicle of Higher
Education, v. 52, March 31, 2006, Bhattacharjee, Yudhijit, “Drop in Foreign Application
Slows,” Science, v. 307, March 18, 2005, p. 1706, and Policy Implications of International
Graduate Students and Postdoctoral Scholars in the United States, pp. 17-34.
19 See for example Mooney, Paul and Shailaja Neelakantan, “No Longer Dreaming of
America,” The Chronicle of Higher Education, v. 51, October 8, 2004, p. A41, Birchard,
(continued...)

---

CRS-5
Institute of International Education reveals that for the academic year 2005-2006,
the number of foreign-born students (in all disciplines) remained steady following a
two-year decline.20 In addition, new foreign student enrollment increased by
approximately 8.3% from the previous academic year. The new enrollments are said
to result from both recruitment efforts by U.S. institutions and recently improved visa
processing for students. The international student enrollment changes are reflected
differently by types of institutions, levels of study, and disciplines.
There are noticeable differences by world region of origin in the flow of foreign
students to the United States. India’s students were 13.5% of the population for
academic year 2005-2006. The other countries of origin of foreign students falling
within the top ten were China (11.1%), Republic of Korea (10.4%), Japan (6.9%),
Canada (5.9%), Taiwan (4.9%), Mexico (2.5%), Turkey (2.1%), Germany (1.6%),
and Thailand (1.6%). The top ten fields of study for all foreign students were:
business and management (17.9%), engineering (15.7%), other (10.5%), physical and
life sciences (8.9), social sciences (8.2%), mathematics and computer sciences
(8.1%), optional practical training (7.4%), fine and applied arts (5.2%), health
professions (4.8%), and undeclared (3.2%).21
Participation Rates in Science and Engineering
NSF data reveal that in 2004, the foreign student population earned
approximately 32.1% of the doctorate degrees in the sciences and approximately
61.3% of the doctorate degrees in engineering.22 In 2004, foreign students on
temporary resident visas23 earned 28.4% of the doctorates in the sciences, and 57.2%
of the doctorates in engineering.24 (See Figure 1). The participation rates in 2003
were 27.4% and 55.3%, respectively. In 2004, permanent resident status25 students
earned 3.7% of the doctorates in the sciences and 4.2% of the doctorates in
19 (...continued)
Karen, “Canada Seeks More Foreign Students,” The Chronicle of Higher Education, v. 51,
April 29, 2005, p. A39, and Altbach, Philip G., “Higher Education Crosses Borders - Can
the United States Remain the Top Destination for Foreign Students?,” Change, March/April
2004. pp. 19-24.
20 Institute of International Education, Open Doors 2006 Online: Report on International
Educational Exchange, November 13, 2006, [http://opendoors.iienetwork.org/].
21 Ibid.
22 National Science Foundation, Science and Engineering Doctorate Awards:2004, Detailed
Statistical Tables, NSF05-300, Arlington, VA, February 2006, Table 3.
23 A temporary resident is a person who is not a citizen or national of the United States and
who is in this country on a temporary basis and can not remain indefinitely. The terms
nonresident alien or nonimmigrant are used interchangeably.
24 Science and Engineering Doctorate Awards:2004, Table 3.
25 A permanent resident (“green card holder”) is a person who is not a citizen of the United
States but who has been lawfully accorded the privilege of residing permanently in the
United States. The terms resident alien or immigrant apply.

---

CRS-6
engineering, a decrease from the 2003 levels of 4.2% and 5%, respectively. Trend
data for science and engineering degrees for the years 1995-2004 reveal that of the
non-U.S. citizen population, temporary resident status students consistently have
earned the majority of the doctorate degrees. (See Tables 1 and 2).
Disaggregated data for the subfields of science provide a detailed picture of
Figure 1. Doctorate Degrees: U.S. and Non-U.S. Citizens, 2004
degree recipients by U.S. citizenship and non-U.S. citizenship status. In 2004,
foreign students (temporary and permanent resident status) were awarded 43.7% of
the doctorates in the physical sciences, an increase from the 41.4% awarded in 2003.
In mathematics, 54% of the doctorates were awarded to foreign students in 2004, an
increase from the 48.9% awarded in 2003. For the computer sciences, 53.6% were
awarded to foreign students, an increase above the 2003 level of 50.2%. The earth,
atmospheric, and ocean sciences and the agricultural and biological sciences awarded
36% and 30.7% of the degrees respectively to foreign-born students in 2004,
compared to the 2003 levels of 34% and 31.6%. In the social sciences and
psychology, 21.9% of the doctorates were awarded to foreign students in 2004, a
slight decrease from 22.4% awarded in 2003.26
26 Science and Engineering Doctorate Awards: 2004, Table 3.

---

CRS-7
Table 1. Science Doctorates: Non-U.S. Citizens — Temporary
and Permanent Residents as a Percentage of Total Awards,
1995-2004
Total
Temporary
As % of Total
Permanent
As % of Total
Sciences
Residents
Awards
Residents
Awards
1995
20,528
4,880
23.8
2,553
12.4
1996 20,932
5,102
24.4
2,216
10.6
1997 21,117
4,954
23.5
1,688
8.0
1998 21,354
5,194
24.3
1,540
7.2
1999
20,603
5,046
24.5
1,250
6.1
2000
20,645
5,208
25.2
1,059
5.1
2001
20,043
5,173
25.8
979
4.9
2002
19,512
5,042
25.8
895
4.6
2003
20,011
5,491
27.4
834
4.2
2004
20,499
5,820
28.4
758
3.7
Source: Science and Engineering Doctorate Awards: 2004, Table 3.

---

CRS-8
Table 2. Engineering Doctorates: Non-U.S. Citizens- -
Temporary and Permanent Residents as a Percentage of Total
Awards, 1995-2004
Total
Temporary
As % of Total
Permanent
As % of Total
Engineering
Residents
Awards
Residents
Awards
1995
6,008
2,527
42.1
956
15.9
1996
6,309
2,734
43.3
793
12.6
1997
6,115
2,555
41.8
593
9.7
1998
5,924
2,582
43.6
479
8.1
1999
5,330
2,192
41.1
403
7.6
2000
5,321
2,452
46.1
350
6.6
2001
5,505
2,791
50.7
299
5.4
2002
5,076
2,648
52.2
272
5.4
2003
5,278
2,916
55.2
266
5.0
2004
5,776
3,302
57.2
241
4.2
Source: Science and Engineering Doctorate Awards: 2004, Table 3.
The NSF provides specific data on the country of origin of foreign-born science
and engineering doctorate awards. Data for 2004 reveal that of the earned doctorate
degree holders, 28.3% were from China, 8.5% were from India, 3.9% were from
Taiwan, 3.8% from Canada, 3.7% from Africa, 3.4% from Turkey, 1.8% from Japan,
and 1.1% from the United Kingdom.27 See Figure 2 for additional disaggregated data
on doctorate degrees awarded to non-U.S. citizens by country of origin.
27 Science and Engineering Doctorate Awards: 2004, Table 11.

---

CRS-9
Figure 2. Non-U.S. Citizens Awarded Doctorates in
Science and Engineering by Country or Citizenship,
2004
Support of Foreign Students in Graduate School
Certain restrictions have been placed on foreign students with temporary
resident student status who are enrolled in graduate programs in U.S. institutions.
Foreign graduate students are required to be full-time students, and are prohibited,
due to visa restrictions, from seeking employment.28 While they are prohibited also
from obtaining most fellowships, traineeships or federally guaranteed loans, they are
able to be employed as research assistants or teaching assistants on federally funded
research projects.29
Foreign and U.S. science and engineering graduate students receive financial
support from many resources — personal, university (primarily through teaching
28 Restrictions are primarily because of their temporary status and related visa restrictions
imposed by the Immigration and Nationality Act.
29 Limited funds are available, however, to foreign students (J-visas for cultural exchange)
within the Fulbright program.

---

CRS-10
assistantships, research assistantships/traineeships, fellowships/dissertation grants)30,
foreign government, employer, and other.31 Many foreign students receive support
from their home country, though it is generally limited to the first year of study.32 For
the continuing years, the university usually provides support mostly in the form of
research assistantships or teaching assistantships. While temporary resident foreign
students are ineligible for direct federal aid, the university support provided to them
through research assistantships and teaching assistantships often result from federally
funded research grants awarded to their home institution.33
The 2006 report, Doctorate Recipients from United States Universities:
Summary Report 2005, reveals that institutions of higher education provide a
significant amount of support, primarily through teaching assistantships, research
assistantships/traineeships, and fellowships/dissertation grants, to foreign students
on temporary and permanent resident visas.34 In all fields, a greater percentage of
non-U.S. citizen doctoral recipients receive financial assistance from universities
than do U.S. doctoral recipients.35 (See Table 3 for primary sources of financial
support.) A disaggregation of the data by race/ethnicity reveal that 41.% of black
doctoral students relieved on their own resources to finance their graduate studies,
followed by Native Americans at 37.4%, whites, at 31.7%, Hispanics, at 32.7%, and
Asians, at 17.2%.36
30 Private foundations, federal agencies, and state governments are usually the original
sources of these funds.
31 A significant number of doctoral students receive support from more than one source or
one mechanism. Multiple sources of support may occur in the same academic year.
32 A new educational bilateral exchange program entered into by President Bush and Saudi
King Abdullah will provide full tuition support for approximately 15,000 Saudi students
studying in U.S. institutions in the academic school year 2006-2007. “US Schools Compete
for Thousands of Saudi Students,” International Herald Tribune, September 9, 2006.
33 The NSF reports that “Total Federal support of graduate students is underestimated since
reporting on Federal sources includes only direct Federal support to a students and support
to research assistants financed through the direct costs of Federal research grants. This
omits students supported by departments through the indirect costs portion of research
grants; such support would appear as institutional (non-Federal) support, since the university
has discretion over how to use theses funds.” Science and Engineering Indicators 2000,
Volume I, NSB00-1, Arlington, VA, January 13, 2000, pp. 6-29.
34Doctorate Recipients from United States Universities: Summary Report 2005, pp. 26-30.
35 Primary mechanisms of support differ broadly by discipline and field of study.
Admittedly, various graduate programs have different financial aid policies and
mechanisms, with science and engineering programs offering more fellowships and
traineeships than other disciplines.
36 Doctorate Recipients from United States Universities: Summary Report 2005, p. 63.

---

CRS-11
Table 3. Primary Sources of Financial Support for Doctorate
Recipients, 2005
U.S.
Permanent
Temporary
.
Total
Citizen
Visa
Visa
Primary Source of Support
All Fields
N
38,531
24,900
1,488
11,987
Teaching Assistantships
%
17.1
15.3
21.9
20.3
Research

Assistantships/Traineeships
%
26.9
16.9
31.3
47.2
Fellowships/Dissertation
Grants
%
27.5
30.7
26.3
21.1
Own Resources
%
22.7
31.4
16.1
5.5
Foreign Government
%
1.7
0.0
---
5.2
Employer
%
3.8
5.4
2.6
0.7
Other
%
0.2
0.2
---
0.0
Source: Doctorate Recipients from United States Universities: Summary Report 2005,
p. 63.
NOTE: Includes only doctorate recipients who reported primary source of support.
In the physical sciences, which include mathematics and computer sciences,
universities provided the primary support for 82.1% of temporary resident students,
73.1% for permanent residents, and 58.5% for U.S. citizens.37 In engineering, 81.1%
of temporary resident students received primary financial support from universities,
as did 71.1% of permanent resident students, and 42.3% of U.S. citizen doctoral
students. Even in those disciplines where foreign students do not participate with any
degree of frequency (i.e., education and the social sciences), larger percentages of
foreign doctoral students on temporary and permanent resident visas obtained their
primary financial assistance from universities than did comparable U.S. students. In
the field of education, 41.4% of temporary resident doctoral students received their
primary financial support from universities; for permanent resident students, 38.7%,
and for U.S. citizens, 13.3%. In the social sciences, universities provided financial
support to 51.9% of temporary resident doctoral students, 41.2% for permanent
residents, and 33.6% for U.S. citizens.
Perceived Benefits and Problems
There are divergent views in the scientific and academic community about the
effects of a significant foreign presence in graduate science and engineering
programs. Some argue that U.S. universities benefit from a large foreign citizen
37 University support includes teaching assistantships, research assistantships, and research
traineeships.

---

CRS-12
enrollment by helping to meet the needs of the university and, for those students who
remain in the United States, the Nation’s economy.38
Foreign students generate three distinct types of measurable costs and benefits.
First, 13 percent of foreign students remain in the United States, permanently
increasing the number of skilled workers in the labor force. Second, foreign
students, while enrolled in schools, are an important part of the workforce at
those institutions, particularly at large research universities. They help teach
large undergraduate classes, provide research assistance to the faculty, and make
up an important fraction of the bench workers in scientific labs. Finally, many
foreign students pay tuition, and those revenues may be an important source of
income for educational institutions.39
The increased participation of foreign students in graduate programs has
generated critical responses by many in the minority community. Blacks, Hispanics,
and Native Americans, historically underrepresented in the science and engineering
fields, contend that disparity exists in the university science community with respect
to foreign students.40 It is charged that there is not equal access for U.S. minorities
to graduate education, receipt of scholarships, promotion to higher ranks, receipt of
research funds, access to outstanding research collaborators, and coauthorship of
papers and other outlets for scientific publications. Frank L. Morris, professor,
University of Texas, charges that colleges and universities employ exclusionary
mechanisms. Rather than supporting minority graduate students, institutions provide
the majority of their resources to departments that have admitted foreign students.
In testimony before the Subcommittee on Immigration and Claims, Morris states that:
The generous immigration policy coupled with the much better and
disproportionate and much better subsidy out of U.S. taxpayer funds of foreign
doctoral student over all American minority students and especially much better
than the support given to African American doctoral students. . . . This has
created a situation that place the economic well being of the African American
community in jeopardy because we have received inadequate doctoral training
to prepare for or compete in an increasing information and higher order
scientifically technologically driven current and future U.S. economy.41
Another criticism noted by some is that foreign student teaching assistants do
not communicate well with American students. Language as a barrier has been a
38 The Institute of International Education reports that foreign students contribute
approximately $13.5 billion annually to the U.S. economy in money from tuition, living
expenses and related costs. The Department of Commerce estimates that U.S. higher
education is the nation’s fifth largest service sector export.
39 Borjas, George, Center for Immigration Studies, An Evaluation of the Foreign Student
Program, June 2002, [http://www.cis.org/articles/2002/back602.htm], pp.6-7 .
40 See for example Rogers, Ibram, “Black Scholars Speak Out Against Immigration Reform,”
Diverse, v. 23, June 15, 2006, p. 9, and House Subcommittee on Immigration and Claims,
Impact of Immigration on Recent Immigrants and Black and Hispanic Citizens, 106th Cong.,
1st Sess., March 11, 1999, p. 22, prepared statement of Julian R. Betts, Associate Professor,
Department of Economics, University of California, San Diego.
41 Ibid., Testimony of Frank L. Morris, Sr., p. 33.

---

CRS-13
perennial problem for some foreign students.42 There are charges that the “accented
English” of the foreign teaching assistants affects the learning process.43 A large
number of graduate schools require foreign teaching assistants to demonstrate their
proficiency in English, but problems remain.44 Several states have passed legislation
setting English-language standards for foreign students serving as teaching
assistants.45
Some academics and scientists do not view scientific migration as a problem,
but as a net gain. These proponents believe that the international flow of knowledge
and personnel has enabled the U.S. economy to remain at the cutting-edge of science
and technology. A 2005 report of the National Academies states that:
The participation of international graduate students and postdoctoral scholars is
an important part of the research enterprise of the United States. In some fields
they make up more than half the populations of graduate students and
postdoctoral scholars. If their presence were substantially diminished, important
research and teaching activities in academe, industry, and federal laboratories
would be curtailed, particularly if universities did not give more attention to
recruiting and retaining domestic students.46
Foreign Scientists and Engineers in the U.S. Labor
Force
During the 1980s, the number of immigrant scientists and engineering entering
the United States remained somewhat stable (12,000), registering only slight annual
increases. In 1992, there was a marked increase in the admissions of scientists and
engineering, fueled primarily by the changes in the Immigration Act of 1990 that
allowed significant increases in employment-based quotas of H-1B visas. By 1993,
the number of scientists and engineers on permanent visas increased to 23,534.47 The
numbers were increased further as a result of the Chinese Students Protection Act of
42 In addition to the Korean, Japanese, Vietnamese, Chinese, Arabic and Spanish speaking
students, there are the other languages such as Malay, Thai, Indonesian, Tongan, Ibo,
Tagalog, Hungarian, Haitian, Creole, and Farsi.
43 Gravois, John, “Teach Impediment - When the Student Can’t Understand the Instructor,
Who is to Blame?,” The Chronicle of Higher Education, v. 51, April 8, 2005, p. A10, and
Bollag, Burton, “New Test of English as a Foreign Language Puts an Emphasis on
Speaking,” The Chronicle of Higher Education, v. 52, October 7, 2005, p. A49.
44 Sarkisian, Ellen, Teaching American Students, A Guide for International Faculty and
Teaching Assistants in Colleges and Universities, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1997, 109 pp.
45 Gravois, John, “Teach Impediment - When the Student Can’t Understand the Instructor,
Who is to Blame?,” p. A10.
46 Policy Implications of International Graduate Students and Postdoctoral Scholars in the
United States, p. 65.
47 National Science Foundation, Major Declines in Admissions of Immigrant Scientists and
Engineers in Fiscal Year 1994, NSF97-311, Arlington, VA, June 18, 1997, p. 1.

---

CRS-14
1992.48 Science & Engineering Indicators 2004 reports that the proportion of foreign
born scientists and engineers in the U.S. labor force reached a record in 2000,
revealing high levels of entry by holders of permanent and temporary visas during the
1990s.49 The issuance of permanent visas in the past few years has been impacted by
administrative changes at the Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services,
changes in immigration legislation, and any impact of September 11th. The NSF
reports declines in high-skilled related visas issued from 2001 to 2003. These
declines are attributed to a decrease in the number of students and workers applying
for visas and the percentage of visa applications rejected by the State Department.
Foreign scientists and engineers on temporary work visas have generated
considerable discussion.50 As previously stated, recent legislation has increased the
annual quota for the H-1B program in which foreign-born workers can obtain visas
to work in an occupation for up to six years. The H-1B program, generally, is
thought of as an entry for technology workers, but it is used also to hire other skilled
workers.51 Science & Engineering Indicators 2002 states that “An H-1B visa is
sometimes used to fill a position not considered temporary, for a company may view
an H-1B visa as the only way to employ workers waiting long periods for a
permanent visa.”52 Data on selected occupations for which companies have been
given permission to hire H-1B visa workers are contained in Table 4.
48 As an outgrowth of the 1989 Tiananmen Square uprising, Chinese students residing
temporarily in the United States were allowed to adjust to permanent resident status in
1993.
49 Data were from the 2000 Census. Science Indicators 2004, p. 3-4.
50 See Thibodeau, Patrick, “H-1B Fraud Investigations Are Expected to Increase,”
Computerworld, March 21, 2005, Vaughan, Jessica, Center for Immigration Studies,
Shortcuts to Immigration, The Temporary Visa Program is Broken, January 2003,
[http://www.cis.org/articles/2003/back103.htm], and General Accounting Office, H-1B
Foreign Workers: Better Tracking Needed to Help Determine H-1B Program’s Effects on
U.S. Workforce, GAO03-883, Washington, DC, September 2003, 47 pp.
51 Data from the Office of Immigration Statistics reveal that the industry employing the
largest number of H-1B workers in FY2003 was computer systems design and related
services. There was a 12% increase from FY2002 to FY2003 in the employment of H-1B
workers in computer related positions. Department of Homeland Security, Office of
Immigration Statistics, “Characteristics of Speciality Occupation Workers (H-1B): Fiscal
Year 2003,” November 2004, p. 20.
52 National Science Foundation, Science and Engineering Indicators 2002, Volume I,
NSB02-1, Arlington, VA, January 15, 2002, p. 3-32.

---

CRS-15
Table 4. H-1B Petitions Approved by Select Occupation Group,
Fiscal Year 2003
Occupation
Total
Percent
Computer-related Occupations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
83,114
38.5
Engineering, Architecture, and Surveying ). . . . . . . . . .
26,843
12.4
Medicine and Health . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
15,623
7.2
Miscellaneous Professional, Technical, and
4,876
2.3
Managerial . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Life Sciences and Social Sciences . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
13,820
6.4
Mathematics and Physical Sciences . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5,679
2.6
Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
23,980
11.1
Other . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
43,405
20.1
Total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
217,340
100.00
Source: Department of Homeland Security, Office of Immigration Statistics,
Characteristics of Speciality Occupation Workers (H-1B): Fiscal Year 2003, November
2004, 23 pp. NOTE: “During FY2003, USCIS approved 217,340 H-1B petitions submitted
by employers on behalf of alien workers. The number of approved petitions exceeds the
number of individual H-1B workers because sometimes more than one U.S. employer
submits a petition on behalf of individual H-1B workers (multiple petitions). The number
of approved petitions for initial employment exceeds the cap because of employer-based cap
exemptions and multiple petitions for individuals. For example, approved petitions for
initial employment are exempt from the cap because the sponsors are institutions of higher
education or nonprofit organizations affiliated with institutions of higher education.” p. 4.
Some argue that the influx of immigrant scientists and engineers has resulted
in depressed job opportunities, lowered wages, and declining working conditions for
U.S. scientific personnel. While many businesses, especially high-tech companies,
have recently downsized, the federal government issued thousands of H-1B visas to
foreign workers. There are those in the scientific and technical community who
contend that an over-reliance on H-1B visa workers to fill high-tech positions has
weakened opportunities for the U.S. workforce.53 Many U.S. workers argue that a
number of the available positions are being filled by “less-expensive foreign labor.”54
Those critical of the influx of immigrant scientists have advocated placing
restrictions on the hiring of foreign skilled employees in addition to enforcing the
existing laws designed to protect workers. Those in support of the H-1B program
maintain that there is no “clear evidence” that foreign workers displace U.S. workers
in comparable positions and that it is necessary to hire foreign workers to fill needed
positions, even during periods of slow economic growth.55 A September 2003 report
53 Schwartz, Ephraim, “H-1B: Patriotic or Treasonous?,” InfoWorld, v. 27, May 6, 2005,
[http://www.infoworld.com/article/05/05/06/19NNh1b_1.html], and Matloff, Norman,
“Should the U.S. Increase its H-1B Visa Program? Con: Wages Belie Claims of a Labor
Shortage,” SFGate.com, December 7, 2006.
54 Johnson, Carrie, “Hiring of Foreign Workers Frustrates Native Job-Seekers,” Washington
Post, February 27, 2002, p. E01.
55 See for example Anderson, Stuart, and Michaela Platzer, “Should the U.S. Increase its H-
(continued...)

---

CRS-16
of the General Accounting Office (GAO), H-1B Foreign Workers, Better Tracking
Needed to Help Determine H-1B Program’s Effects on U.S. Workforce, states that:
While a number of employers acknowledged that some H-1B workers might
accept lower salaries than U.S. workers, the extent to which wage is a factor in
employment decisions is unknown. Labor’s Wage and Hour Division (WHD),
which is responsible for ensuring that H-1B workers are receiving legally
required wages, has continued to find instances of program abuse. The extent to
which violations of the H-1B program take place is unknown and may be due in
part to WHD’s limited investigative authority.56
The maturing of the computer industry has wrought its own set of problems
relative to employment of foreign scientists and engineers.57 There are some who
contend that the salary of the foreign-born computer professionals working in the
United States is lower than that of their U.S. counterparts who are the same age and
educational level. Others charge that the hiring of H-1B workers “undermines the
status and bargaining position of U.S. workers.”58 The Department of Labor has
sought to enforce the existing policies on temporary employment of nonimmigrant
foreign workers under H-1B visas, and to penalize those employers who are found
to be in violation.59
Many in the scientific community maintain that in order to compete with
countries that are rapidly expanding their scientific and technological capabilities, the
United States needs to bring in those whose skills will benefit society and will enable
us to compete in the new-technology-based global economy. Individuals supporting
this position do believe that the conditions under which foreign talent enters U.S.
colleges and universities and the labor force should be monitored more carefully.60
55 (...continued)
1B Visa Program? PRO: Skilled Immigrants Innovate,” SFGate, December 7, 2006, Baker,
Chris, “Visa Restrictions Will Harm U.S. Technology, Gates Says; Microsoft Chief Calls
For End to Caps On Workers,” The Washington Times, April 29, 2005, p. C13, and Clark,
John, Nadine Jeserich, and Graham Toft, Hudson Institute, Can Foreign Talent Fill Gaps
in the U.S. Labor Force? The Contributions of Recent Literature, September 2004, 33 pp.
56 General Accounting Office, H-1B Foreign Workers, Better Tracking Needed to Help
Determine H-1B Program’s Effects on U.S. Workforce, GAO-03-883, Washington, DC,
September 2003, p. 26.
57 See for example Hart, David M., The Information Technology and Innovation Foundation,
Global Flows of Talent: Benchmarking the United States, November 17, 2006, 18 pp.,
Roberts, John, “Potential Rise in H-1B Visas Augurs More IT Job Competition, Bigger
Talent Pool,” Dr. Dobb’s Portal-The World of Software Development, June 13, 2006,
[http://www.ddj.com/dept/global/189400870], and Thibodeau, Patrick, “Sidebar: Foreign
Students Fill Computer Science Graduate Programs,” Computerworld, February 28, 2005.
58 Federation for American Immigration Reform, Deleting American Workers - Abuse of the
Temporary Foreign Worker System in the High Tech Industry, August 2003, 17 pp.
59 Approximately 25% of current H-1B visa holders change from foreign student status.
Lowell, B. Lindsay, H-1B Temporary Workers: Estimating the Population, p. 15.
60 A June 2006 report of the GAO revealed that from January 2002 through September 2005,
(continued...)

---

CRS-17
And there are those who contend that the underlying concerns of foreign students in
graduate science and engineering programs is not necessarily that there are too many
foreign-born students, but that there are not enough U.S. students entering the
scientific and technical disciplines.
In testimony before the House Subcommittee on 21st Century Competitiveness
and Select Education, C.D. Mote, Jr., President, University of Maryland, College
Park, stated that :
Other nations are competing effectively for [foreign students and scholars in
science and engineering] and will gain technological advances, weakening our
economic and technological position and our security. New contenders in the
fiercely competitive environment of higher education emerge daily. China has
set a goal to greatly increase over the next decade the number of universities, and
some will be of world-class stature. Taiwan and Japan also plan to build top
universities. Though most of the world’s top universities are currently in the
U.S., many are determined to change this balance, and they probably will. To
remain competitive in the coming decades, we must continue to embrace the
most capable students and scholars of other countries. Our security and quality
of life depend on it.61
Policy Implications
The debate on the presence of foreign students in graduate science and
engineering programs and the workforce has intensified as a result of the terrorist
attacks of September 11, 2001. It has been reported that foreign students in the
United States are encountering “a progressively more inhospitable environment.”62
A June 2006 report of the Association of International Educators, Restoring U.S.
60 (...continued)
approximately 33% of the H-1B visa applications were for workers in computer system
analysis and programming occupations. The next highest requesting group was those of
college and unviersity education workers, at approximately 7%. The GAO report found
certified visa applications with inaccurate information and that the review process itself
lacked quality assurance controls. Government Accountability Office, H-1B Visa Program-
Labor Could Improve Its Oversight and Increase Information Sharing with Homeland
Security, GAO-06-720, Washington, DC, June 2006, 52 pp. NOTE: Effective July 7, 2004,
the GAO’s legal name became the Government Accountability Office, a provision of the
GAO Human Capital Reform Act of 2004, P.L. 108-271, 118 Stat.
61 House Committee on Education and the Workforce, Subcommittee on 21st Century
Competitiveness and Select Education Committee on Education and the Workforce,
Tracking International Students in Higher Education: A Progress Report, 109th, 1st Sess.,
March 17, 2005, Written testimony of C.D. Mote, Jr., President, University of Maryland,
College Park.
62 House Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee on Immigration, Border Security, and
Claims, Sources and Methods of Foreign Nationals Engaged in Economic and Military
Espionage, 109th, 1st Sess., September 15, 2005, Written testimony of William A. Wulf,
President, National Academy of Engineering, p. 12, and Foroohar, Rana, “America Closes
Its Doors,” [http://msnbc.msn.com/id/6038977/site/newsweek/print/1/displaymode/1098].

---

CRS-18
Competitiveness for International Students and Scholars, states that “ . . . [F]or the
first time, the United States seems to be losing its status as the destination of choice
for international students.”63
Concerns have been expressed about certain foreign students receiving
education and training in sensitive areas.64 There has been increased discussion about
the access of foreign scientists and engineers to research and development (R&D)
related to chemical and biological weapons. Also, there is discussion of the added
scrutiny of foreign students from countries that sponsor terrorism.65 The academic
community is concerned that the more stringent requirements of foreign students may
have a continued impact on enrollments in colleges and universities.66 Others
contend that a possible reduction in the immigration of foreign scientists may affect
negatively on the competitiveness of U.S. industry and compromise commitments
made in long-standing international cooperative agreements.67
The issue of tracking foreign students attending U.S. institutions has generated
particular debate in the academic and scientific community following the September
11th terrorist attacks.68 Prior to September 11th, the Illegal Immigration Reform and
Immigrant Responsibility Act (P.L. 104-208) authorized the Student and Exchange
Visa Program/Coordinated Interagency Partnership Regulating International Students
63 NAFSA: Association of International Educators, Restoring U.S. Competitiveness for
International Students and Scholars, June 2006, p. 2.
64 See Brainard, Jeffrey, “Pentagon Backs Off on Foreign Researchers,” The Chronicle of
Higher Education, v. 53, September 1, 2006, p. A48, Massachusetts Institute of Technology,
In The Public Interest, Report of the Ad Hoc Faculty Committee on Access to and
Disclosure of Scientific Information, June 12, 2002, pp. 11-15, and Cooper, Helene and
Thom Shanker, “Draft Iran Resolution Would Restrict Students,” The New York Times,
October 26, 2006. NOTE: The Bureau of Consular Affairs, Department of State, issues
visas to foreign students and maintains a “technology alert list” that includes 16 sensitive
areas of study. The list was produced in an effort to help the United States prevent the
illegal transfer of controlled technology, and includes chemical and biotechnology
engineering, missile technology, nuclear technology, robotics, and advanced computer
technology.
65 The State Department publishes a list annually of state sponsors of terrorism. Currently,
the countries include Cuba, Iran, Libya, North Korea, Sudan, and Syria. CRS Report
RL32251, Cuba and the State Sponsors of Terrorism List, by Mark P. Sullivan.
66 American Council on Education, Leading Academic, Science Groups Propose Visa
Reforms to Boost U.S. Economic Competitiveness and Scientific Leadership, May 18, 2005,
[http://www.acenet.edu].
67 “Current Visa Restrictions Interfere with U.S. Science and Engineering Contributions to
Important National Needs,” Statement from Bruce Alberts, President National Academy of
Sciences, Wm. A. Wulf, President, National Academy of Engineering, and Harvey Fineberg,
President, Institute of Medicine, December 13, 2002, [http://www4.nationalacademies.org].
68 Homeland Security Presidential Directive 2, “Combating Terrorism Through Immigration
Policies,” and American Association for the Advancement of Science, Science &
Technology in Congress, “Tracking Foreign Students,” November 2001, pp. 1, 4, 6.

---

CRS-19
(SEVP/CIPRIS).69 This electronic information reporting system for tracking foreign
students and researchers was to replace the existing paper-based format. The
legislation required colleges and universities to monitor and compile data on foreign
students attending their respective institutions in such areas as date of
enrollment/reporting, field of study, credits earned, and source of financial support
for the student.70 The information was to be provided to the INS by the colleges and
universities. However, the system was never fully implemented, primarily because
institutions described it as being too costly, an “unnecessary burden on colleges and
universities,” and “an unreasonable barrier to foreign students.”71
The USA Patriot Act (P.L. 107-56 ) and the Enhanced Border Security and Visa
Entry Reform Act (P.L. 107-173) revised and enhanced the process for collecting and
monitoring data on foreign students and researchers in U.S. institutions.72 In response
to the legislation, the INS developed the Student and Exchange Visitor Information
System (SEVIS). SEVIS, a web-based system, was designed to maintain current
information on foreign students and exchange visitors in order to ensure that they
arrive in the United States, register at the institution or predetermined exchange
program, and properly maintain their visa status during their stay.73 Congress
directed the then INS to have the tracking system in operation by January 30, 2003.
The deadline for implementation of SEVIS was extended to February 15, 2003.74
69 The Illegal Immigration Reform and Responsibility Act was signed into law on October
1, 1996.
70 Colleges and universities were required to collect the information, but were not required
to automatically report it to the INS.
71 Marlene M., Executive Director and CEO, Association of International Educators,
“Thinking Clearly About Foreign Students and Terrorism,” September 20, 2001, Peterson,
Jonathan, and Trounson, Rebecca, “Foreign Students Being Checked, INS Asked to Create
Computerized System,” Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, September 29, 2001, p. A-5, Sheridan,
Mary Beth, “Visa Tracking System Limited by Lack of Personnel,” Washington Post,
February 25, 2002, p. A03, Zernike, Kate and Drew, Christopher, “A Nation Challenged:
Student Visas; Efforts to Track Foreign Students are Said to Lag,” New York Times, January
28, 2002, p. 1A, and “U.S. Urged to Give More Details on Database for Tracking Foreign
Students,” The Chronicle of Higher Education, v. 48, February 8, 2002, p. A22.
72 The USA Patriot Act was signed into law on October 26, 2001. The Enhanced Border
Security and Visa Reform Act was signed into law on May 14, 2002.
73 For expanded discussion of SEVIS see CRS Report RL32188, Monitoring Foreign
Students in the United States: The Student and Exchange Visitor Information System
(SEVIS), by Alison Siskin.
74 The deadline for implementation of SEVIS was extended to February 15, 2003. August
1, 2003 was the date by which all institutions must enter data into SEVIS for those students
who were enrolled prior to January 30, 2003. NOTE: In addition to SEVIS, the Department
of State requires institutions to submit, electronically, basic biographic information about
their foreign students. The information becomes part of the Department of State’s new
Interim Student and Exchange Authentication System (IDEAS), a temporary Web-based
international student information collection system required by the Enhanced Border
Security Act of 2001. IDEAS is separate from SEVIS and directs that institutions submit
the necessary information to both systems. IDEAS went into effect on September 11, 2002
(continued...)

---

CRS-20
However, SEVIS experienced considerable problems and created excessive delays
in processing visa applications.75 The more rigorous screening of visa applicants was
one factor contributing to the delays.76 The current problems with SEVIS are
reported to be primarily those relating to technical matters and personnel costs.
On September 13, 2005, the House Subcommittee on National Security,
Emerging Threats, and International Relations held a hearing to examine the
procedures put in place to correct the gaps and vulnerabilities in the visa process.77
Attention was directed at the mechanisms that are necessary to strengthen the visa
process as an antiterrorism tool while simultaneously facilitating legitimate travel by
foreign students, scientists, researchers, and others in the United States.78 Witnesses
testified that consular workloads had increased significantly, yet the visa-processing
offices continued to lack strategic direction, adequate resources, and training. In
addition, reliable data were not readily available, across and among departments and
agencies, to determine security and visa fraud related issues and overall increased
visa wait times.79 Witnesses stated that because visa policies and requirements are
ongoing and can change quickly, clear procedures on visa issuance and monitoring
operations worldwide are necessary to guarantee that visas are adjudicated in a
consistent manner at each visa-issuing post.
The Government Accountability Office (GAO) has released several reports
detailing the efforts and the improvements that have been made in the visa
processing. Other reports of the GAO assessed agencies’ progress in implementing
recommended changes in visa operations.80 An April 4, 2006 report — Border
74 (...continued)
and will remain operational until SEVIS achieves total implementation.
75 Murphy, Caryle and Nurith C. Aizenman, “Foreign Students Navigate Labyrinth of New
Laws,” Washington Post, June 9, 2003, p. B01, Greene, Marcia Slacum, “Computer
Problems Slow Tracking of Foreign Students,” Washington Post, March 26, 2003, p. A06,
and Arnone Michael, “Colleges Expect the Worse in Preparing for New System to Track
Foreign Students,” The Chronicle of Higher Education, v. 49, September 6, 2002, p. A33.
NOTE: Less than 2% of all visas issued are student visas.
76 For a discussion of the screening process and review procedures for visa issuance, see, for
example, John Marburger, Director, Office of Science and Technology Policy, Speech
before the American Association for the Advancement of Science, Science and Technology
Policy Colloquium, April 10, 2003, Washington, DC. p. 5.
77 House Committee on Government Reform, Subcommittee on National Security, Emerging
Threats, and International Relations, Combating Terrorism: Visas Still Vulnerable, 109th
Cong., 1st Sess., September 13, 2005.
78 All 19 of the terrorists of the September 11th attacks had been issued temporary visas.
79 The State Department’s database did not have any information linking the September 11th
attackers with terrorists activities, however, there was information in other agencies’
databases.
80 See for example Government Accountability Office, Border Security: Stronger Actions
Needed to Assess and Mitigate Risks of the Visa Waiver Program, GAO-06-1090T,
September 7, 2006, 23 pp., H-1B Visa Program: More Oversight by Labor Can Improve
(continued...)

---

CRS-21
Security, Reassessment of Consular Requirements Could Help Address Visa Delays,
stated that while steps have been taken to improve the visa application system,
additional issues required immediate attention.81 The recommendations included
clarifying visa policies and procedures in order to facilitate their implementation, and
ensuring that consular officers have access to the needed tools to improve national
security and promote legitimate travel.
On May 25, 2006, major immigration legislation was passed by the Senate —
S. 2611, the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Bill of 2006. The bill would,
among other things, ease the restrictions on foreign students in scientific and
technical disciplines. S. 2611 would raise the statuary limit for highly educated
temporary workers on H-1B visas from 65,000 to 115,000, and provide for a
potential annual increase in the ceiling by 20%. The bill would expand the types of
individuals who would no longer be subjected to the annual limits on legal
immigrants. Included in this group would be those who: (1) hold an advanced degree
in science, mathematics, engineering, or technical fields and who have been working
in the United States in a related field for three years on a nonimmigrant visa; (2) hold
a master’s degree or higher from an accredited institution in the United States; and
(3) work in a “shortage occupation,” as determined by the Secretary of Labor. The
House-passed version of the immigration bill, H.R. 4437, did not propose such
revisions to the H-1B visa.
Oversight by the 109th Congress touched on some of the following questions:
Are the more-restrictive visa policies enacted following September 11th dissuading
foreign students from studying in the United States? Do immigration ceilings affect
the health of the national R&D enterprise? Would a reduction in the immigration of
foreign scientists impact negatively on the competitiveness of U.S. industry? Should
there be separate immigration ceilings for scientists and engineers? Can U.S.
students be encouraged to participate in graduate science and engineering programs
in numbers approximating that of foreign students? Should certain foreign students
be prohibited from receiving education in certain disciplines? Does higher education
have a responsibility to address the concerns about foreign students who return to
their home country carrying away vital science and technology? It is anticipated that
the 110th Congress will continue to monitor the participation of foreign students in
graduate science and engineering programs and the processing of visas for foreign
science students and scholars. There may be further debate regarding the increased
scrutiny of foreign students from countries that sponsor terrorism. Added attention
80 (...continued)
Compliance with Program Requirements, GAO-06-901T, June 22, 2006, 20 pp.,Border
Security: Strengthened Visa Process Would Benefit from Improvements in Staffing and
Information Sharing, GAO-05-859, Washington, DC, September 2005, 55 pp., and Border
Security: Streamlined Visas Mantis Program Has Lowered Burden on Foreign Science
Students and Scholars, but Further Refinements Needed, GAO-05-198, Washington, DC,
February 18, 2005, 39 pp.
81 Government Accountability Office, Border Security: Reassessment of Consular Resource
Requirements Could Help Address Visa Delays, GAO-06-542T, Washington, DC, April 4,
2006, 17 pp. (Testimony before the House Committee on Government Reform – Statement
of Jess T. Ford, Director, International Affairs and Trade).

---

CRS-22
may be given to the restrictions placed on the participation of foreign students and
scientists in certain types of R&D, including the use of research equipment necessary
for conducting unclassified, fundamental research.82
82 House Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee on Immigration, Border Security &
Claims, Sources and Methods of Foreign Nationals Engaged in Economic and Military
Espionage, 109th Cong., 1st Sess., September 15, 2005, Testimony of the Honorable Michelle
Van Cleave, [http://judiciary.house.gov/media/pdfs/ForeignNational9705.pdf].

---