Clinton Shows His Stripes on High-Tech Visas

Bill Clinton’s defenders have now returned to one of their favorite arguments, complaining that the news media are devoting too much attention to the Monica Lewinsky scandal and should be focusing instead on more substantive matters. This is an effective strategy, however, only when Clinton’s official presidential actions are any more conscionable than his alleged extracurricular activities.

Because while last week’s headlines were dominated by news of grand jury subpoenas and DNA testing, White House officials were quietly moving on a policy agenda that would put them at odds with two of their most important constituencies and negatively impact the most important factors in California’s continued economic growth. By threatening to veto legislation that would increase the number of visas for legal immigrants trained in high-technology job skills, the Clinton administration was staking out political turf on the wrong side of both the immigration and the high-tech policy debates, provoking erstwhile supporters in Silicon Valley and the immigrant rights community to understandable confusion and justified anger.

The American Competitiveness Act, as the visa bill is known, is supported by bipartisan majorities in both houses of Congress. But under pressure from organized labor, administration officials announced last week that the legislation would be vetoed unless a variety of onerous and costly pro-union amendments are included. For Clinton, who has devoted enormous time and energy selling the virtues of both technology and immigration, the decision is a testament to the precarious political condition in which the Lewinsky scandal has left him.

Clinton’s relationship with organized labor on these types of issues serves as a useful guide to the diminished strength of his presidency. In his first term, Clinton took on the unions and the left wing of his own Democratic Party to pass the North American Free Trade Agreement. Last year, as allegations of campaign fund-raising improprieties swirled around the White House, Clinton quietly abandoned plans to pass “fast-track� trade authorization so as not to offend these same allies.

And as the Lewinsky mess continues to worsen, Clinton now clings to his party’s base more closely than ever. So when Silicon Valley companies asked for a temporary increase in the number of visas issued to legal immigrants possessing necessary job skills, Clinton stood with the unions against the same global economic forces that he once championed.

Few politicians have courted the technology community’s leaders as assiduously as have Clinton and Vice President Al Gore. Central to their message has been the premise that the so-called New Democratic economic agenda is virtually identical to that of Republicans. But the flaw in this premise was exposed once again last week. When organized labor complained to Clinton that the additional work visas were unacceptable, the president tossed his high-tech pals over the rail and assured the union bosses that their demanded protections would be a required part of any compromise bill.

But this predicament is more complicated than just a business-labor standoff. Clinton’s opposition to the legislation also may end up costing him his historical advantage on immigration-related issues. One of the hallmarks of Clinton’s presidency has been his willingness to demagogue the issue of immigration reform for political gain. By deliberately blurring the distinction between legal and illegal immigration, Clinton has implied that opponents of illegal immigration are concerned not with the laws regarding entry into this country, but with the racial and ethnic ancestry of those who attempt to enter.

At the same time that he works to demonize his opponents, Clinton has tried to portray himself as a champion of legal immigration. In a commencement speech this summer, Clinton told his audience, “I believe new immigrants are good for America. They are revitalizing our cities. They are building our new economy. . . . They are energizing our culture and broadening our vision of the world. They are renewing our most basic values.�

But Clinton’s support for legal immigration goes only so far. It appears that when those same immigrants get in the way of organized labor’s protectionist and isolationist agenda, their contributions to our economy, our culture and our values aren’t that important after all.

The political equation is a simple one. Clinton is in serious trouble, and he can’t afford a fight with the labor unions. So he does their bidding, even at the expense of California’s most valued economic and human commodities.