Posted originally on the CTH on August 30, 2026 | Sundance |
CTH strongly emphasizes two key policy sectors, Maganomics and Immigration enforcement; they go together. We cannot achieve the economic results we want for the American people unless strong and powerful immigration enforcement is in place.
While the Dept of Homeland Security (DHS) navigates the deportation and removal process (painfully slow in my opinion), Secretary of State Marco has revoked, blocked and restricted visa entry processes. The State Dept effort is strong, but continually encounters resistance from the Lawfare communists who are trying to destroy U.S. nationalism.
NASSCOM (National Association of Software and Service Companies) is an Indian non-governmental trade association and advocacy group that primarily serves the Indian technology industry. Founded in 1988, NASSCOM operates as a nonprofit organization and serves as a key entity within the Indian technology sector. NASSCOM is the primary advocacy group for manipulating the U.S. visa entry system.
When we discuss the politics in countries who accept bribes and payments for influence in political decisions, we call that bribery and corruption. However, when the exact same activity takes place in Washington DC, we call it Lobbying. NASSCOM is now spending money to purchase U.S. politicians and look specifically about how they frame the discussion. (emphasis mine):
[…] Ameet Nivsarkar, VP in Nasscom, said the association was working on various strategies to limit the adverse impact of the immigration bill. “We are engaging with coalitions and consortiums in the US like the US India Business Council, an independent think-tank. It’s also important for our members and non-members to be a part of the advocacy through multiple engagements that requires having local representatives in the US or even talking to their customers to raise the issue on their behalf,” he said.
The immigration bill seeks to make work visas like H-1B more expensive and difficult to obtain for companies that already have a high proportion of their US staff on such visas. Infosys, for instance, is said to have almost 90% of their 15,000 employees in the US on such visas. If these visas become difficult to obtain, it will compel Indian IT companies to significantly alter their business models. They would either have to hire many more local Americans, which would be expensive, or find ways to do more of the work offshore, which would be difficult. Any such changes would put Indian IT companies at a disadvantage against their global competitors who have a strong local American presence. {SOURCE}
As noted by Amanda Louise on X: “[NASSCOM’s] concern wasn’t that jobs would go unfilled because America lacked skilled workers. It was that companies like Infosys would have to “hire many more local Americans, which would be expensive.”
“Americans weren’t described as unavailable. Americans were described as the more expensive alternative.
And they acknowledged the other half of the problem.. companies with a “strong local American presence” would have a competitive advantage if visa-dependent companies lost easy access to that labor.
That tells Americans exactly what this business model does. Use visa labor to lower costs. Compete against companies that hire more Americans. Win their contracts. And now those American-employing companies have fewer jobs to offer too.
The American worker loses twice.
So why are we still debating what these visa programs are being used for? Their statements tell us the incentive. The immigration filings show us the scale. The layoffs show us who pays the price.
How much more evidence does Congress need before it answers why U.S. immigration policy gives companies a competitive advantage for hiring visa workers instead of Americans?”
