Last week, my X feed erupted with debates about H1B work visas. Since I lack expertise on the topic, I opted not to join the algorithmic frenzy. However, the arguments I encountered in this modern-day online town square sparked some weekend reflection.
At the core of my economic philosophy is a simple principle: what’s good for America must also be good for Americans. Policies framed as being in the nation’s economic interest should equally serve the economic interests of its citizen stakeholders. For instance, what benefits corporations like BlackRock or General Dynamics doesn’t automatically benefit our countrymen who are striving for the American Dream. Yet, this distinction is rarely acknowledged in debates over economic policy. Instead, we often hear arguments dressed up in what I call value terminology.
Value terminology refers to language designed to shape opinion by framing issues in ways that seem universally agreeable. For example, the horrors of abortion are often referred to in value terms like “women’s healthcare.” On the surface, no reasonable person would be opposed to women having access to medical care. Thus why activists coined terms like "reproductive healthcare" to mask the reality of children dismembered in utero. Similarly, in the military, controversial policy changes—or questionable defense contracts—are justified under the ever-vague banner of “readiness.” Other examples frequently encountered in public discourse include phrases like “in the public interest” or “for the public’s good.” These terms often mask underlying complexities or serve to manipulate public opinion.
The H1B visa program allows employers to recruit foreign talent for specialized roles. I saw both praise and criticism of the program in the maelstrom of online comments over the weekend. What stood out to me, however, were examples of H1B visas being granted for roles like university professors, high school English teachers, and consultants—fields where there’s no shortage of qualified Americans. But the larger argument I observed H1B supporters making is that the only way to have top tech and engineering talent in America is to import it from overseas. It makes one wonder how the nuclear fleet of the U.S. Navy operates, how the skylines of America’s major cities were designed, and how this nation pulled off inventing the internet with American ingenuity.
Though I lack expertise in immigration policy, I can still form a philosophical perspective. To that end, I pose this question to H1B advocates: What have you done to tap into the vast pool of veteran talent? My LinkedIn feed is replete with fellow patriots who served the nation in uniform with the open to work feature turned on. Veteran employment challenges remain a historical constant. Many among those with the talent to run the military are still left out in the cold with hiring managers who make excuses that include criticism of resume style, fear of PTSD, and difference in the communication and management styles trained into former military members.
If companies are willing to invest resources in recruiting overseas talent, navigating complex visa processes, and relocating employees to the U.S., why can’t they expend similar effort to identify and hire talented veterans who have extensive experience in all vocational specialties? If a CEO’s true interests are in finding the best talent to make the nation better, he would have immediate allies in that cause among the majority of those who spent time in military service. If the true goal is to secure the best talent for America’s success, veterans—individuals who have already demonstrated discipline, leadership, and commitment—are a natural fit for that mission.
Trump Has Entered the Chat on H-1B Visas
What’s good for America must also be good for Americans. While there are times when outside expertise is essential—such as the German engineering contributions to the early space program—today’s use of H1B visas appears more about payroll convenience for large employers than addressing critical strategic needs to preserve the nation’s outlook on freedom moving forward.
The burden of proof lies with H1B proponents to show how the program benefits Americans. It is not the responsibility of Americans who are struggling in this age of rampant inflation, housing shortage, and increased unemployment to justify why importing foreign workers might be harmful. For a policy or program to be good for America, it must be good for Americans.
Chase Spears served as a U.S. Army public affairs officer for 20 years, retiring as a Major (Promotable) in 2023. Chase holds a Ph.D. in leadership communication from Kansas State University, and today, he runs a leadership practice that helps people to turn brave ideas into action. You can find him on X/LinkedIn/Substack/YouTube @drchasespears.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member