The issue is important and there is a general agreement on the solution around high skilled immigration. The problem is is the politics and the economy and jobs have been prumped by the politics of immigration. I think there are four paths. One could be the pass the senate not be taken up in the senate. There is a lottery that would flult raising the overall level of immigration. If there was an agreement to include that that bill could be passed. A second option which is what the president has ind indicated he favors is to link high skilled immigration with the dream act. So it is a broader solution around immigration. The third would be to say this deals with the 50,000, this deals with a million five. The third would be deal with 11 million which clearly we have to as a nation deal with and there is a desire now more than there might have been a month ago to do. That and ive heard a number of people talk about the need to take up the issue and called for a comprehensive solution. So thats third. The fourth path would be to say that this immigration path in the short run is challenging and build support for the senator warners bill, such as regulatory issues and commercialization of research. Those strike me as the four paths. If i had to bet. I think something will happen this year and it will probably be number two or number three. I think something will happen linked to the dream act or some version of that or perhaps its comprehensive Immigration Reform. I do worry, even though thats a problem we need to solve t more complicated it gets the harder it is to get done. But any of those four paths would be plausible. Im optimistic that one of them would happen and does need to happen this year. If not, were going to regret it. I am optimistic too but i still think there is an 80 chance were not going over the fiscal cliff. If you look back at the history of in effect the immigration lottery system that we had, youll find a lot of american entprures came through that program and this notion there is going to be a tradeoff, maybe preelection. That was the reality but not now. The change that took place on election day was these items like startup 2. 0, serve for that. Thats the starting point. Dream act which i think is an embarrassment we didnt pass already, somebody who lives in a Common Wealth i see many kids grown up in virginia and gone to virginia hools and parents have paid taxes for years and in the process of trying to continue their american experience, we luckily were able to overturn legislation and try to exclude those folks from going to college. But that i think becomes now maybe not a given but its sure as he can going to be fairly shortly. The chalsleng now going to be because there are these 11 million undocumented persons who work in america trying to sort through some path of legal status for those folks which i think has to be a National Priority as well. So that the items of what could have passed before, theres been a size mick shift, people are going to say we need to do more here and not deal with just high scailed or not even just those kids when have lived here for years and give them a path to get an education or serve in our military. But i think were going to be on that comprehensive. Better than a 50 chance you have a comprehensive solution . I think. So i think there is going to be a subject of a lot of debate and discussion and were going to need the scholars at the prom today and folks to help us think through this, do you take it as a series or comprehensive bill. I think its hard to take an issue on which a lot of people agree and get action on it unless theres trust that some of the other issues that are maybe have less consensus have trust those issue also also get addressed. Thats one of the reasons comprehensive Immigration Reform is attractive to ensure all the immigration issues get addressed at once. Its a reason that the senators start up 2. 0 bill is attractive is because it sees other issues. I want to pose another way that you could view the highly educated immigrant as part of a larger issue and that the noninstruction for our own students. What i see happening in many of the stitesths states and a greatly renude emphasis in why American Students are not doing as well in the stem fields as you might expect and why we dont have our graduate schools full of app cants coming from american schools instead of so many foreign app cants. I would not want the rerl form of immigration for highly skilled workers to be a substitute of our own problem getting our own students excited in science and engineering. If we could cut the atransition rate of students in science and engineering, we could meet many of our need in the United States for stem workers. So i think its important that we have the trust if we address the high skilled immigration issue, we dont do that as a substitute for looking at all these other issue that is still need work. Your question ends up being do i trust that congress will do something and track vord not too good. One thing i want to say in response to senator warner who i agree with almost all the time which he said the election was a size mick shift. I think its important that both sides dont overplay their hand. I understand the democratic side of president obama winning reelection and by a pretty significant electoral margin. It also was clear if you looked at the data that the reason for that predominantly was the latino vote. Indeed one statistic if mitt romney had gotten the same percentage of latino vote george w. Bush got he probably would have won. You have to get right with this demographic shift so republicans have to move quickly to compromise. Democrats can hold our line its our way or the highway. Ive heard that in the last few weeks. Button republican side the president won but 48 of people didnt support him and the republicans are in control of the house because of redistricting, most people in the house are in safe districts and will be punished if they move together and compromise. There is a recognition and something needs to happen. But its going to require some genuine goodwill, trust, negotiations on both sides to come together for some common solution. They both basically are saying thats all fine, they have to compromise and these guys are saying over my dead body, were not going to raise the overall immigration or amnesty or some of the things you hear. Youre going to see a stalemate. Its going to require finding some Common Ground and Work Together and celebrate compromise. What you said at the end, i should go on. Two things i think there is a much more alignment. The Business Community has been for comprehensive Immigration Reform for a long time. Perhaps not as forcefully as i wish they would have been. There is no doubt there is a skilled immigration issue and a rational program that works in certain industries. But one part of Immigration Reform that might be the subject of a future miller sight discussion is i dont think we will get comprehensive Immigration Reform until we have, and this is a challenging issue, a thoughtful question aboutitety validation. And that pushes issues around immigration and homeland security, it pushes issues around Electronic Medical records. And the sooner we get thoughtful about that so that after Immigration Reform there is a way we have a right to enforce our borders and have an employer and employee ability to check the legal status of somebody working, thats going to push us into some uncomfortable conversations. Questions, comments, we have one here. Thank you for taking the time to speak with us today. My question is given the issue of out sourcing wharks impact do you think it has on immigration policy and should it have and vice verse sa . I think that that a lot of the original outsourcing was driven by difficult rerble cost in labor. I think one of the hidden stories that that has not been as reported is thats come down in low and mid skill immigration and tech jobs. I think one of the challenges with our current policies is companies that have global foot prince, if they cant hire that high skilled individual that comes out of an American University here but they can hire them in china they will be able to do so and it is tied into this high school immigration discussion. I got to add that technology has created more advanced ought mated factories and that has resulted in fewer jobs necessary to build products. There is no question about that and that is a negative in terms of job creation. But its also positive in that we have seen a little bit of a trend, and we saw apple this week announce they were going to make one of their products in the United States. It was related to the economics underliing this. If you need fewer people to make the stuff, then the cost difficult rerble to make it here versus there i did minute shs then the argument is we can make it. Number two there is a National Advisory counsel and one of the areas of focus has been in Additive Manufacturing which is really an interesting area. Over the next decade it has the potential to have much more personal liesed approach, more custo approaches to manufacturing that could result in more things being made here as opposed to being made other places. So it is a concern but people are more optimistic now than five years ago because some of this Technology Advancing actually is starting to be in some sectors a little bit of a positive. Over here. Yeses. Thank you for this excellent panel. My question is for senator warner and you mentioned a couple of changes youd like to see with the veessa. The question i have for you is this remains a serious point of contention with Information Technology workers who have continuele pressure on their jobs. A lot of jobs have been moved overcease and those job losses have been facilitated by the hbv rks 1 visa. How are you going to address that . What kind of things can you put in a comprehensive reform that will actually help and protect some i. The workers here from having their jobs going overcease . A couple of points. One, weve talked about a stem, a graduate stem visa, one category over here. That really is at those very kind of high Knowledge Level jobs. We again, most folks would acknowledge, we are not producing enough of our own. The h 1 b is silent on the totals. And i think that you raise a valid point but a part of what i believe about being able to drive i. The jobs back into america, one of the things i think weve done a fairly dreadful job on is finding those mid tech jobs that could be very easily located in rural america. Where the most push back against immigration changes and about the transform tive change brought about by the information sage rural america. They say we can build it anywhere but we havent done a good job of building it in martensville virginia. I think there is a chance of mid tech jobs that are attractive. I have talked about the sbreprurel visa that says those individuals captive to that company that their path to legal status in america separate would be one the tooblet raise independent capital and hire additional americans. So in and of itself that would be a job creator and a job creator of americans. A question right here. I think that probably the most important point made tonight was made by president sullivan about timing. Weve been successful in talking to the various countries they need to open up their markets for individual ent prenurelism and we see lots of people going back to india because weve opened up their markets there. And the other issue is china, we need to keep the Chinese People here because when they go back they are going to compete with us. Timing i think is everything and we need to get this going and now. And there is perhaps an important point in dividing the visa issue from the general immigration issue because one can be dealt with much more quickly than the other one can. Any comments than . Thats actually been my view for sometime. Because of the urgency around invasion moving quickly to deal with high skill immigration is the rights way to go and very supportive of what senator war warner have been doing and if trfs a consensus in the white house i would be delighted. My own assessment is thats unlikely. Unless there say broader solution around immigration, doesnt have to be everything which is why it might be the start back plus the dream act. It could be comprehensive. My own guess is that reading the tea leaves this my day job is vesting companies this is like moonlighting on the side lines so there are people up here who know a lot more than i do but my sense of it talking to people doing it in a bipartisan kind of way it probably at this point in order to get traction there needs to be a broader discussion on immigration. There is a question right here up front. Well do that and then here. Im an immigrant. Ive been here about 13 years. I think im still trying to get a green card. Im still on a visa. My question is i feel like were at a chire practice, we are singing the same hymn and talking about the pitch of the hymn. I feel the immigrant as a brand is a bad brand in the United States. My question is how do we change the brand of immigrant and make it more positive because i think that will enable legislation that will get all these things were talking about to get done. Ive been here 13 years. Ive never had anybody say to me anything negative personal little about being an immigrant but i know the immigrant brand is not so positive in the United States. So how do we change that image of immigrants and let people know immigrants are making a lot of contributions. I think somebody mentioned the i dont go gurt, i had no idea it was an immigrants company. There are all these companies which maybe it needs to be like a marketing campaign, i dont know, but something i think should be done to change the image of immigrants and make it more posssive. And i think that will facilitate everything that were talking about today. How do you guys think we can maybe change that image of immigrants and make it more positive and not make everybody when they think of immigrants they think of border wars on History Channel . Well, at different times and places immigrants have been viewed more or less favorably in the United States. This is a nation of immigrants but when immigration was largely cut off during the 1920s a lot of americans became estranged from the immigrant roots of their forebearers and lost the sense that we were a nation of immigrants. But in some parts of the country today you see the enormous vitality that comes with a really diverse and active population that attracts immigrants and the kind of zestfulness they add to a Community Like those in Northern Virginia or Southern California or texas where i spent most of my adult life. So im not sure its true that everybody has a negative attachment to immigration. But on the other hand, i think the political controversy about immigration much about undocumented immigrants has led people to a negative cast to immigration. I can tell you that the United States as well as europe and many other countries including eventually china because of our current demographic situation, we will turn to immigration increasingly because our ter tilt is approaching below replacement level so immigration will be a necessity. The chinese are thinking about the fact their one child policy is going to lead to them having a much older population soon with fewer children. So immigration becomes another way they can continue the Economic Vitality of their country. So to me immigration and vitality are closely linked. I think thats true for many Business People in the United States and the university. Not too sure about the politicians. I think we have to remind people the story of america is a story of immigration. Some of the most Iconic Companies in the country were founded by immigrants. Its been the history for a long time. I believe the reason its so sensitive now is the debate around immigration is the debate around ilLegal Immigration and there needs to be more focus on Legal Immigration and less about the problem and more about the opportunity. And then reframing it is winning the global battle for talent that is the next industries that are going to drive the next century. Im an immigrant and naturalized citizen and started my own company. Im a big fan of president sullivan. My question is that we talk about immigration coming here. But i think one of the questions i want to ask the panel is about the unknown immigration thats going the other way. With the immigration policy thats been set up, we have many universities setting you will up outpost basically taking the talent pool of our professors and science leaders and spreading it throughout. And also the whole notion that in china and india where there is a tremendous amount of University Research parks being built and they are being created where the labs are ready to go, its worse than that, isnt it . They are offering superstar professors double the salary and everything they want plus if youre in the medical field, any type of clinical testing you want to do to make sure that your almosts get going because they have different laws than we do. If there Say Technology drain, its also in terms of the u. S. Laws we only prohibit certain type of technology that has to do with National Security and technology. But when you talk in steves case the talent of the invite tive things that get sucked out along with that, thats nobody really talks about that so id like to hear from you. Its