Search the Internet          Tips

Rekhi clarifies on immigration issue

When Kanwal Rekhi joined the Immigrant Support Network in their efforts to fight for the rights of immigrant workers, it was seen as a major coup for the ISN since Rekhi brought clout as a successful entrepreneur, angel investor and Indian immigrant who has helped many other Indians find their way to success in Silicon Valley.

Rekhi had in April told rediff.com that his goal was 'to increase awareness and hopefully down the road help change the immigration process and laws'.

"Most people who have visas don't care about immigration problems, people like me, who are citizens and are green card-holders," Rekhi had said. "They are not participatory in this debate... and people who care don't have a say in the process."

Rekhi held forth on ways to reform the US immigration process and scaling back family reunification-based immigration.

The last part, however, turned out to be controversial with prominent South Asian community activists, journalists and scholars righteous in their indignation towards what was perceived to be a distinction on Rekhi's part between professional and working-class immigrants.

A debate flared up on the electronic mailing list of the South Asian Journalist Association, and people took sides, some supporting Rekhi, others blasting him.

However, Rekhi did not join the debate nor clarified his views on the issue though the rumbling of opinions begged for a clarification.

On Wednesday, Rekhi broke his silence and released the following statement:

'My involvement with the Immigrant Support Network is rooted in my personal revulsion against the present H1B visa regime, which has turned these visa holders into modern-day indentured slaves in the eyes of American law.

The argument I advanced was that it is unworthy of the US, a nation of immigrants, to have these economically underpowered people among us. They are tied to a specific job at a specific employer and are totally beholden to these employers. They can be out of status for no fault of their own.

If the employer is in trouble because of a bad business decision and has to curtail its activities, H1B visa people are first to go and have no recourse; with no unemployment insurance payments and no right to alternate employment, these people are rendered totally helpless. They are treated as if they are here illegally and are totally unwelcome.

That is not the case. They are here legally and because US employers have provided sponsorship to bring them here for jobs for which no local candidates exists.

Nobody has a right to demand rights to immigrate, but if the US needs to import workers for its own sake, then it must do so in an honorable fashion. It must show a certain sense of fair play and allow these people to fend for themselves.

Our generation of immigrants were treated fairly and allowed the economic freedom to fend for ourselves. I was laid off three times and moved from New Jersey to Florida and then on to California within two years. I went where the jobs were.

We were allowed to compete in the marketplace and eventually came out on the top. Many of us became entrepreneurs and produced jobs and wealth in the society. Both the society and we were winners in that model.

Under the present rules everybody is likely to be a loser. Underpowered, stressed-out workers are not going to be able to compete, or prepare for a long haul that more likely than not will turn them into bitter and cynical people.

A temporary visa should be temporary and not for six years. These people should not be asked to contribute for social security or unemployment insurance. The burden should be on employers, who sponsor them in the first place, to provide for them. In any case, I do not see US needs here to be temporary.

The raging debate about my views regarding secondary immigration were taken out of context. I hold no views about who should be or who shouldn't be allowed in. I am too much of a free marketer to worry about the quality of one profession over the other. I did make a distinction between primary and secondary immigrants in that primary immigrants come on their own merit and compete like hell to survive on their own.

Secondary immigrants often were sponsored brothers and sisters who were not qualified to be primary immigrants and needed lot of help to adjust here.

Incidentally, I am somewhat of an expert here, having sponsored five brothers and a sister and spouses over a 15 year period.

I am not against family re-unification at all. Is an endless loop of sponsored brothers and sisters family reunification?

If the US needs to import farm workers and other non professionals (as it most certainly does) then it should let them come in under the law and show them the same dignity that it did to us.

My point was that somewhere along the line there was a backlash against immigrants, in spite of the tremendous good they did, which is embodied in visas like H1B, and it is people like us who have to stand up and speak against that.

I have spent the last several weeks doing that.'

Back to top

Tell us what you think of this report