August 6, 2025 • 30 mins
It's 2025, and immigration lawyers are still mailing PDFs to government scanners. Melissa Harms and the hosts explore game-changing solutions: point-based visa systems, state-sponsored immigration programs, and AI-powered processing. The choice is clear—embrace an abundance mindset that built America's economic dominance, or watch our archaic 1946 system drive innovation overseas. From small business strategies to federal reform, this episode maps the pathway from medieval madness to modern immigration policy.
Timestamps:
- (00:00) Potential Solutions and Final Thoughts
- (01:46) Immigration Reform: Balancing Innovation and American Workers
- (02:46) Student to Worker Transition: Reforming OPT and H-1B Systems
- (04:58) State Programs: Why Local Solutions Matter
- (10:31) Small Business Solutions for Hiring International Talent
- (16:17) AI and Technology: Ending the PDF Mailing Madness
- (21:37) Abundance vs. Scarcity: America's Immigration Crossroads
- (24:59) What Did We Learn: The Path Forward
📢 Solving America’s Problems Podcast – Real Solutions For Real Issues
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Alex (00:00):
We've exposed the mess—now let's fix it.
From states sponsoring their own talent toAI ending the PDF printing madness Melissa
described, these aren't pipe dreams.
They're real solutions for choosingabundance over scarcity, exactly
when America needs them most.
Jerremy Newsome (00:16):
So if you had to sum this up, you can do it delicately or not.
What is working, isthere a portion of this?
You're like, man, we're crushing it here.
We're doing really great.
Melissa Harms (00:28):
I think one of my frustrations with H one Bs, and again,
I keep coming back to those 'causeit really is 70 to 80% of what we do.
One of my frustrations with those hasbeen the way they change the adjudication
standards without any sort of lawmaking.
They just say, Nope, that doesn'tcount as a specialty occupation.
When they had more lax standardsabout those H one Bs, it did work.
(00:49):
And when we didn't have this lotterysystem for H one Bs, it did work because
like I said, when companies can hire a USworker and not pay these fees, they will,
and having those, even those inflatedsalary surveys, just having some sort
of salary protection on there, it works.
What I think would work better issome sort of point system where we
(01:10):
can look at, and, other countries dothis, where we look at the individual's
education, we look at, not if it's a.
Bachelor's degree, but lookat a points, look at how long
they've worked in the industry.
Look at, how, what is theirimpact gonna be on the US economy.
Like some sort of point system wherewe capture it in a different way.
I think that could really work.
(01:30):
I think the NIW, the streamlined MIWs for cases where people really are
doing important work, we need that back.
We need some sort of way to get thesecases approved for people who are
generating money and jobs for Americans.
So that was a really
Jerremy Newsome (01:48):
No,
Brilliant.
Melissa Harms (01:49):
flaky response because there's not too much
that's working great right now.
Jerremy Newsome (01:53):
you gave me a good segue because looking at Canada's point
based immigration system, maybe you know,Australia's regional programs where it's
easier to immigrate to underpopulatedareas, you feel like that would be a
very relevant thing to make a shift into.
Melissa Harms (02:09):
I do.
And I'm definitely on themoderate side of immigration.
There are people who feel likewe should have open borders and
I don't think we can do that.
I want common sense immigrationreform, but it should make sense with
balancing the needs of US workersagainst what we need to remain relevant
the world economy and innovative.
I think that we're, especially, wehaven't really talked about this,
(02:32):
but the recent crackdown on Americanuniversities from the current
administration we're gonna lose our bestand brightest of the university setting.
And I think that's thebeginning of the end to me.
Jerremy Newsome (02:42):
Yeah.
Valid.
Talking about that.
'cause I'm a huge educational guy.
If you could the student toworker transition process.
What type of pathway would that look like?
Or how would that kind ofbe reformatted, Melissa?
Melissa Harms (02:58):
I think what would be great is to have some of these
workers work under this, like whatwe call OPT and be required to do OPT
before they transition to H but nothave them worry about the lottery.
So if they had.
Three years of work experienceunder OPT, then they didn't have
to go into the lottery because thenyou can have employers really try
(03:19):
'em out and make sure that they'rereally somebody they wanna invest in.
Because if, and I have this happenall the time, where somebody will
say, the company will say we hiredthis person, but they're just not
cutting it, so we're gonna lay 'em off.
So give them a chance to train them andfigure out if they are worth it before
they sponsor them for H one B, butdon't have it be this fear-based system
(03:39):
where I better sponsor them or they'llnever get a chance to work with me.
Jerremy Newsome (03:42):
I really enjoy kinda like what you mentioned in the sense
of there should be some type of systemapproach where you have US based
students, obviously internationalbased students obviously, but if the
internationals do wanna stay here, getvisas, get working, visas working into
a transition, like just having that be.
Grade related, right?
(04:03):
Like how do they do,how do their scores do?
What
Do?
What type of jobs are they trying to get?
And then making theemployment so much easier.
'cause that kind of blows mymind a little bit, that a company
can sponsor someone and they'rein India and it takes 12 years.
That's like the fourth of someone's life.
Melissa Harms (04:21):
Yes.
To get a green card.
Jerremy Newsome (04:22):
already said, yes, let's do this.
Melissa Harms (04:24):
I think getting back to the student I mean I think that's
where the system is broken right nowis that you do have this connection
between the schools and the employers.
We bring in these foreign studentsand we bring in a lot of them and we
bring 'em in to get educated here.
So when we're bringing 'em in toget educated here, there needs to
(04:45):
be a pathway for them to stay andimplement that education, right?
So that's why the federal government, insome ways does need to get involved in
the students and how many they're bringingover are they just bringing 'em over?
'cause they can pay full tuition.
'cause a lot of schools.
The foreign students pay more, right?
So they make a lot of moneyoff the foreign students.
Bring 'em over but then there'sgonna be no pathway for them to stay.
(05:08):
It creates this friction right there.
So that's where there needs to be.
If you are brought into a US school andyou are in that top percent to be at that
institution, then I feel like there shouldbe a way for you to stay here and work in
the us But let's not bring over, I don'teven know the numbers, but 10 million
foreign students and only have a pathwayfor 85,000 of them to stay, every year.
(05:31):
That's where I feel like the breakdownhappens is that these students
come in with the feeling that onceI graduate from here, I can stay.
Jerremy Newsome (05:37):
yeah.
That's a topic of immigration that I.
Definitely know that not a lot of peopleare discussing right now, which I'm so
happy to have you on this podcast for.
Because again, right now, especiallywith the Trump administration and it's
all about alligator Alcatraz and theundocumented and the asylum seekers.
But to that point, is a hugeportion that's affected by
(05:58):
totally different aspects.
We're like, Hey, listen, I'm working.
I pay taxes.
I'm a student.
I'm here.
I'm spending money in this economy.
I'm spending money in this country.
I have a job, I work here,and I can't even get it.
I can't stay in.
That is definitely a wild broach.
So I don't think people areeven really truly discussing.
Melissa Harms (06:19):
And expanding on that from the business students I talked to,
there's some people, these individualswith these amazing ideas and they
say to me, I wanna start a business.
I've got funding.
Can I hire myself for H one B?
We have some rules that are makingit a little easier on them, but
not great.
And it is hard.
So let's have a way for them when they'restarting a new business after graduating
(06:40):
from a top five business school forthem to be able to start it and try it.
And let's see what happens.
Maybe it's a short term, you geta five-year visa at a tryout your
business, but let's figure out away if we're gonna bring 'em in, and
they're these amazing people to have'em stay if they're gonna come here.
Jerremy Newsome (06:57):
yeah.
'Cause you talked about, theentrepreneurship route and potentially
that having some different applicationprocess or awareness process point system.
It makes sense to me.
be beyond federal reform, Melissa,and we're talking about schools too.
I was like, what can states and cities do?
Actually to help businessesaccess global talent,
Melissa Harms (07:21):
Quite frankly, there's not a lot they can do because
immigration law is all federal.
So to get these visas, they'rereally working on the federal.
I have a lot of great employers who aredoing things like helping the people on
DACA transition from DACA into an H one B.
Really trying to look at theirworkforce with a holistic view of
how can we help some of these people,asylum seekers, and maybe helping
(07:44):
with some of their fees or whatever.
Because a lot of these people who arein that other bucket I talked about
are actually working at companiesin lawful status, but they're just
in this very transitory phase.
I do encourage employers to lookat sort of ways to be helpful to
your foreign national workforceother than just sponsorship.
Jerremy Newsome (08:04):
Yeah.
And for the small businesses,Melissa, like small business owners
who needs international talent, butfears the system, what are three
practical steps that they couldtake this week, in your opinion?
Melissa Harms (08:16):
That's a really good question.
I do work with a lot ofsmall employers who are very.
They're so nervous about doing it aboutsponsoring somebody for H one B, and I
think the first thing I do is say that'susually a student that they've hired
that they wanna get an H one B for, andI just lay out the costs and say, you
just have to know these are the costs andthese are what you could be sacrificing.
(08:37):
And as long as they're willingto do that then we go forward.
And it's just honestly, find a partnerwho will, an immigration partner who will
explain everything to you very clearlyand simply about what happens next.
And it's hard to understand, but walk youthrough the whole process because that's
what we need with those smaller employers.
I do encourage all my employersto sign up for E-Verify.
(08:58):
I know it's.
It's not the best system, but itdoes show a good faith approach
to following the immigration laws.
So I think E-Verify is definitely useful.
Again, not perfect.
And then I think another thing that youwould wanna look at are some of the,
causes you can help in your community.
There are a lot of different, there's agroup I work with called Talent Beyond
(09:20):
Boundaries, and they help bring inhighly skilled workers who are working.
You might have an engineer that'sin a Syrian basement that would
like to do, electrical engineeringsomewhere very qualified, so they try
to match them up with us employers.
Look at ways like that to find talentwhere you can't find American workers.
So being a little creative andthere are a lot of great ways
(09:41):
you can help for nationals andstill help your business succeed.
Jerremy Newsome (09:45):
And then from a, let's just say even bigger front, right?
So we talked about the small guys.
If American businesses uniteon one immigration, ask
Congress, what should it be?
Melissa Harms (10:00):
I think it would be to give us a workable work visa that
captures like a point-based work visa.
I think if they could, revisit the Hone B with today's economy, today's
professions, like there are a lot ofprofessions now that do allow for a
number of different bachelor's degrees.
The bachelor's degree is aantiquated requirement in my mind.
(10:21):
Looking at your work visa andlook at it more of a point system.
And then, the lottery, makingthe lottery more equitable.
People like the individual who's beenthrough nine times, there should be some
sort of allowance given to people the moretimes they've gone through the lottery.
I don't know.
I think we can just really revisitthe work visa at this point.
Dave Conley (10:41):
So I think it was in previous episodes that we've had.
We also know that, so much ofthis is geared towards college
yet where we need to be doing.
Probably most of the hiring in the UnitedStates is in blue collar professions.
And by and large, the electricians,the concrete workers, the people
who are actually building.
Are from outside of this country.
(11:03):
So what does point-based system mean?
How does that work?
Does it say, oh, youhave a bachelor's degree?
Yes.
Or you have a, high skillset.
Yes.
What does point-based mean?
Melissa Harms (11:16):
I like those examples because I do think that there's points
for different occupations that we need.
So part of that point systemcould be based on what's the
need for that occupation.
And every year there could be some sortof indexing of where are the occupations
that are unfilled by US workers?
And those get an extra point.
(11:36):
So you could bring in people in,because that's another complaint I
have a lot, like maybe it's somebodythat's just an exceptional, very
exceptional sales, for example.
And this person's sales, like that'sprobably my most common need is
that a lot of these companies, thisguy's been selling for me from.
From abroad, and his salesnumbers are through the roof.
I wanna bring him into theUS and I'm like, no, I can't
(11:57):
get a visa for a sales guy.
No way.
No how so maybe past performance orincome or, there's just some allowance
for a lot of different factors besidesthat just being your educational degrees.
Jerremy Newsome (12:10):
I am sure AI could track that somewhere, Dave, easily.
It could be some relativelysimple database, but again, it'd
be a good opportunity as wellabout built out and tracked and
measured because that'd be cool.
Kinda like the credit system,which is also totally broken,
but it's the least trackable.
People can log in and see what's going on.
Melissa Harms (12:28):
I, I'm at large.
I'm not a fan of people from theoutside coming in to run the government.
Thinking they know morethan everybody else.
But that said, I do think there's ways youcould privatize some of this, to start a
system using real world common sense abouthow to make the immigration system work.
Jerremy Newsome (12:50):
Yeah, totally.
That's that's a huge blue oceanof opportunity in my opinion.
Just especially, and the conversationwe had last podcast was about the forms
and and helping, all the documentationneeds to happen for the undocumented
immigrants who are trying to come inand they just, they've already been here
for sec seven years and they feel right.
(13:11):
Just go through this whole process,like, how can we speed up everything
And give the ability for lawyers to, or.
Judges to just see things so much faster,articulate things, so much faster,
document things so much faster, becomeaware of the problem, the solutions so
much quicker, turn days into minutes usingsome AI scanning tools, logging tools,
(13:32):
metric tools, things of that nature.
Again, probably we privatize, butultimately is just still a product that
right now would be extremely helpful.
Melissa Harms (13:40):
Yeah I mean with, so my role with our National Lawyers
Association was with I was head of thegovernment collaboration subcommittee
of the technology innovation.
And so I worked with U-S-C-I-Sand some of the stupid stuff
that we're doing right now.
So we, when I file an H one B petition,I can file it online now, but if I
(14:00):
file an H one B work thing online, Ican't use my private case management
system that I use to get all theinformation from these people securely.
I can't use that data and hook it upto U-S-C-I-S right now, there is no
there's no way to connect those two.
Jerremy Newsome (14:17):
Crazy.
Melissa Harms (14:18):
I wanna file something electronically, I have to input the
data myself or my team does, right?
So much data.
So I don't file petitions electronically.
Now, some firms have worked around thisand used done their own sort of API
to make it work that USAS doesn't wantthem doing, but they have done that.
But USAS hasn't created APIs thatwe can use with our private system.
(14:41):
So then we have to inputeverything manually.
So that means I am stillsending paper applications
into U-S-C-I-S, which is giant.
And the way, my team is all, we all are.
We work.
In various places around the country.
So we upload, we have PDFs, everythingstored securely, and then what we
have to do is print that PDF, putit in a FedEx mailer, mail it to
(15:03):
USAS, and then U-S-C-I-S has a teamof people scanning in our paper.
Okay?
So my question was, why can't youlet us upload that PDF until you
have an API where our databasescan talk, let us upload that you
get to fire all your scanners.
(15:25):
I get to save paper and,environmental costs of the shipping.
And they promise us that by the endof fiscal year 2024 has not happened.
Has not happened.
We cannot upload an application yet.
So that's tiny.
That's a tiny idea of how badU-S-C-I-S is, they need to be.
(15:47):
U-S-C-I-S could be completelycleared out as far as I'm concerned
and start it over again, but,
Dave Conley (15:51):
And it's an extraordinarily simple change, right?
Like a, a tech team couldput that together in no time.
Even with archaic systems.
I know this because I did governmentcomputer work and I know how bad
those systems are, but somethinglike accepting A PDF and then, but
because they have to scan it backinto some system anyways is bonkers.
We had a guest last week that, for hiswife they had to take physical photos
(16:17):
down to an office of their wedding toprove that they had gotten married.
And it was like I don't evenknow where to print photos.
What would I do?
What is this?
Melissa Harms (16:27):
Yeah.
Dave Conley (16:28):
it, you've been doing this for 25 years.
25 years from now, whatwould you say we got right?
And what would you say we got wrong?
Melissa Harms (16:41):
You mean where do I see it going the next 25 years
Dave Conley (16:44):
i.
Melissa Harms (16:44):
Yeah.
I don't know.
I'm scared to answer that question becauseI think we're all very scared about the
practice of immigration law in general.
One thing, and this isn't really tothe government, but we're all very
scared of what AI is gonna do toimmigration law because, there's,
immigration is incredibly complex.
People think I just fill outa form and that's all I do.
(17:05):
But there are so manynuances to what we do.
If what we see is that kind of the dumbingdown of immigration law where people are
going to be getting in trouble 'causethey're doing things through AI and
not understanding all the implications.
So that's one that's looking at morethe practice of immigration law.
But then in terms of what I see,our country right now is being fed
(17:26):
so many, lies about immigration.
And I think what my goal is for peopleto get out of this is read the facts
on what immigration does for oureconomy, how they're not replacing us
workers, the e the economic benefits,the taxes that immigrants pay.
All of these positives aboutimmigration, our country.
(17:46):
Rich history with immigration.
We are a nation of immigrants.
And the last really bigamnesty program was by Ronald
Reagan, a Republican, in 1986.
And there were a lot of positivesout of that 1986 amnesty including my
best friend who's now a US citizen,because she was unlawful back in 1986.
No, but there's just the, for theAmerican people to get the truth
(18:10):
because I think particularly in someareas of the country people feel
like immigrants are taking away theirjobs, and that's simply not the case.
And so I think that is more whatI wanna shout from the rooftops
is get the facts out there.
Read about the economic benefits ofimmigration and how can we do this right.
Jerremy Newsome (18:29):
Yeah.
And again, I think we blend bothimmigration challenges together in
the same bucket far too often aswell, just from a media standpoint.
If you go to a county fair andstart talking to people about
immigration, they think it's justpeople coming across the borders.
They're not even thinking about thearea where you're in or the corporations
(18:50):
you're in, their business you're in.
We're like, Hey, we're hiring talent andit's a large number of people and we need
that talent 'cause we're growing, right?
The country's growing.
And to surmise it, for me, it reallycomes down to almost an abundance versus
scarcity mindset where you'll hear thatin books, you'll hear that in programs or
like your random woowoo Instagram channel.
(19:12):
But if we really think aboutthe abundance approach.
We're saying is there's more than enough.
There's more than enough to go around.
There's plenty.
And if we approach it from thescarcity of there's not enough, we
need to shrink, we need to close,we need to be scared, we need to
be worried, we need to be panicked.
There's not enough jobs.
AI's gonna take everything.
Everyone's gonna fight tooth to nail.
That's a scarcity mindset, right?
(19:33):
There isn't a post abundance, postscarcity world coming too, where
everyone has more than enough.
Everyone has opportunities like thatalso exists, and it's gonna require
some level of just bigger thinking.
And I really like that approach.
So where it's like, Hey, listen,this is adding to our economy
and the best way is imaginable.
That's what created this country after wesettled it, in the ginormous open gate of
(19:57):
all the immigrations that we allowed inthe late 18 hundreds, early 19 hundreds.
And that's what caused this countryto become massive, incredible, just
this generous, overflowing cornucopiaof the world's largest economy.
We brought everyone together andwe had that abundant mindset.
We didn't fall into the scarcity, intothe beliefs that there's not enough.
Melissa Harms (20:18):
And that said I wouldn't go so far to say open borders, but we need
a common sense approach and we do need tothink about the job market in particular,
as being, we just want it bigger.
We want it bigger and bigger.
And the more opportunities wecreate, the better off we are.
And so far, I would say over my 25years, I feel like immigration has been
a limiting factor for economic growth.
(20:40):
Particularly, everything I've seenwhen I started back in 2000, it's
like everything's gotten worse.
There's nothing where I can say,oh, this has gotten so much better.
I feel like everything has gotten worse.
That's where you, when you ask meto go 25 years in the future, I'm
like, how much worse can I get?
Jerremy Newsome (20:56):
Yeah.
We need to make some changes now.
We hope that this podcastwill at least inspire a few
thousand people to do just that.
Not only make that change,make that shift, but be aware
create maybe new policies.
As you mentioned, take somethingfrom the private sector, bring
into the governmental sector justin case it can speed up processes.
(21:16):
We've used the word archaic way too much.
We shouldn't be using it this much.
It is 20, 25.
PDFs shouldn't be mailed intoanything, anywhere, ever again.
especially for someone's livelihood,
Melissa Harms (21:30):
Yep.
Jerremy Newsome (21:30):
right?
For someone's life.
You mentioned families, children,jobs, like that's really what this is.
This is economy.
This is growing.
It does not, should not need wordarchaic shouldn't be here anymore.
And I just wanna motivate and encourageeveryone who's here and everyone who's
listening, we have opportunities.
They're all around us.
(21:51):
We just have to look for them.
We have to find them.
And Melissa, thank you for sharingyour wealth of knowledge, your
excitement, your details about thistopic, and giving us a glimmer of not
only hope, but just also solutions.
Easy implications, easy applicationsthat can be upgraded, updated, and
changed to make this a better, faster,quicker, more efficient process.
Melissa Harms (22:14):
Thanks, Jerremy.
It was a pleasure to talk to youand Dave and I look forward to
your resolution of this crisis.
Jerremy Newsome (22:21):
Thank you, Melissa.
Awesome guest.
Very informative, verysmart, great talker.
Dave Conley (22:26):
Yeah.
Jerremy Newsome (22:27):
A lot of good content.
Was able to carry a lot of stuff for us.
You asked amazing questions.
Dave Conley (22:32):
this whole thing has surprised me.
What did you learn?
Jerremy Newsome (22:35):
You know the part that intrigues me.
Is that as a country of this size, wedo just have such mundane processes
that I'm just trying to figure out why.
I know that's why Elon was like,listen, I'm just gonna come in, throw
(22:56):
a couple hundred million dollars.
I'm gonna create the Department ofGovernment efficiency and poof, we'll
have a more effective government.
And that dude who freakingblows up rockets and was
like, nah, that's too hard.
Let's make 'em sit.
Let's make 'em come back to the sameplanet, the same launch launching pad.
Let's reuse a rocket over and over.
(23:17):
guy was like, nah, this is too tough.
Dave Conley (23:19):
This,
Jerremy Newsome (23:19):
Where is this?
Dave Conley (23:21):
The guy who builds all of these incredible businesses
launches things into space like anactual rocket scientist built brand
new cars, tunnels under the ground.
The government broke him.
Jerremy Newsome (23:32):
Yeah,
Dave Conley (23:33):
yeah,
Jerremy Newsome (23:33):
in three months.
And yeah, man, I'm just like that.
Why are we doing it in such a backend?
1947, our girl, Melissa's a 25-year-oldtop tier attorney for huge, mega
businesses and is mailing in documentationthat her team is running down by hand
(23:56):
because she needs to get people's visasso they can have jobs, so they can
support their family, so they can spend.
Thousands of dollars a year on thesestupid taxes that we're probably just
throwing away at people for no reason.
That's what I'm learning, man.
I'm excited to fix and update a lotof these challenges and problems
because I know it's possible.
I know it's doable and it's justconnecting with, I love that she
said the word, the private market.
(24:18):
I am on the exact opposite end ofthat discussion where I think the
privatized sector is where we'veprobably fixed most of the government.
And I don't believe that thegovernment shouldn't be people that
are not probably a double negative.
They should be filled with peoplewho did come from the private
sector, who just were citizens.
We're like, Hey, I've donesome really cool things.
(24:38):
Now my money's figured out.
For the most part, I'm not gonnatake a bunch of money from other
countries or corporations orcompanies to make my lifestyle better.
'cause that's obviously illegaland I shouldn't be doing that.
So I'm just gonna be a publicservant and just make this stuff
run better and quicker, efficient.
My job is to literally sit down andfigure how to solve this problem
within this domain that I'm focused on.
(25:00):
I do not think that immigration shouldbe as federally overwhelming as it is.
I think I've mentioned that before.
I think there should be otherdepartments, other governments, other
efficiencies that should also be handlingthat where it's not the deporter in
chief, Obama, or it's not Trump whoare like, this is not the way it is.
And now I have the 16th largestmilitary in the world ICE all this.
(25:22):
And we're not spending timeto make it quicker, more
efficient and less militaristic.
And that just seems weird to me.
And this is a very fascinating topic.
And again, it is one of the ones to meand many of them have been for sure.
But this is one where I'm like, wow.
Wow.
We wow.
It affects so many people, soblatantly every single day.
yes, education and my main componentdoes affect people daily, but it's
(25:47):
also gonna be something that'sgonna be longer term effects, right?
Like when you study.
Taxes and we study the stock market.
When we study money and we study financeand we study health, those are effects
that do prolong themselves, right?
They take weeks, months, maybe even years,but this is one that's been affecting
people for decades and will continue toaffect people for decades, but affects
people in everyday life right now, ona big scale, no one is seemingly doing
(26:13):
anything about it, and it's quite wild.
That's what I learned.
Hand it over.
Dave Conley (26:19):
Okay.
What did I learn?
I learned that we spend all ofour time talking about illegal and
alligator alley and deportationsand all of the money goes to that.
Yet this topic, legal,immigration, people wanting jobs.
This should be the number one discussionpoint when it comes to immigration.
it's fear mongering.
(26:41):
in comparison to this.
These are people who are building theeconomy, building the next stuff, building
the things that we need in this country.
Pathways to citizenship, pathwaysto, blue collar jobs and the people
who we need to build this country.
I think that this legal immigrationthing needs to be the number one
thing that we're talking about.
(27:02):
And in a way, I think thatsolves the undocumented
All of these people are here fora lot of different reasons, but
primarily, we've learned that alot of it's economically driven.
you want to be in the United States.
These are the people who arebuilding our homes and building our
Jerremy Newsome (27:19):
Yep.
Dave Conley (27:20):
and harvesting food and all those things.
And so the, this discussionneeds to be about.
Jobs and business and economicsand what's right for America.
And I think that solves theillegal immigration part of this.
So I think that we arefocused on the wrong things.
the second thing I learned is I thinkstates should be pretty involved.
Jerremy Newsome (27:43):
Yeah, dude.
Like
Over here.
So I asked a question and after Iasked, I was like, am I an idiot?
Dave Conley (27:50):
I
Jerremy Newsome (27:50):
for asking that question?
'cause she's right.
Dave Conley (27:52):
bonkers.
Jerremy Newsome (27:52):
federal, but there's no one going into the federal government
from an immigration standpoint.
It's a hundred percentstates that get affected.
That's it.
Who else?
Dave Conley (28:02):
And it's different for.
Jerremy Newsome (28:04):
Each state.
Dave Conley (28:05):
states like Arizona, Texas Florida, California.
There's different needs,different aspects to this.
Like why aren't states sponsoring theseH one visas or they have their own visa?
It's okay, yeah, but yougotta work in California.
Oh, boohoo.
I think would be even more valuableis rural, we've talked about this
(28:26):
with housing, like rural communitysponsoring people to be like,
come on in, we got plenty of land.
Jerremy Newsome (28:31):
Yep.
Dave Conley (28:32):
jobs to fill.
It's come on.
We welcome you, rather than the wholeeating our dogs, eating the cats thing.
It's no, come to America and workin our rural hospitals and work in
our, I think states should be deeplyinvolved and there's a disproportionate
impact for states like Texas.
So they're gonna have different,they're gonna have different.
Problems too.
(28:53):
And Texas has different problemsthan Florida, even though we both
have a high immigrant population,so states need to be involved.
And then the last part on the solutionthing is that this thing hasn't really
substantively been touched since 1965, andthen again in the eighties and a little
bit, under DACA with President Obama.
(29:15):
This thing is a patchwork of mess,mainly designed by special interest,
probably, like being very protectionistand they don't know what left
hand is affecting the right hand.
So that's created this Byzantine thing.
And politicians, which we've said overand over again, know nothing about this.
And the people that do know it.
(29:36):
Need to be designing these systems.
Those are business people and thoseare the immigrants themselves.
And we get those two groups togetherin a public private partnership
with saying, okay, are the thingsthat we need to build in America.
These are the social aspects ofthis, and these are the immigrants
and immigrant experiences.
We'd have a really sane immigration plan.
(29:57):
We talked about likethe points-based system.
Like I am sure that a sane immigrationplan that isn't open to all the borders
and isn't nobody comes in, come out ofthis because what we have now is, again,
medieval, we're gonna keep saying that.
Jerremy Newsome (30:13):
Team, if this is firing you up as much as it is myself
and Dave Conley, let just promote thisepisode, promote this entire podcast.
Do what you can, and hit uswith those five star reviews.
Listen, if you've got a 14-year-oldson that has a phone, take it from him.
up the podcast, click that fivestar review, write a quick review.
The more reviews, the more stars that weget, the more people that will listen.
(30:35):
The bigger the audience.
The bigger the audience, the moresolutions that we will not only
think about, know about, hear about,but we will be able to create.
You can find us, solve USAPod on X or solving America's
Problems podcast Instagram.
We are gonna still be here.
We're gonna continue to pour into you.
Thank you so much for being a listener.
You rock.
We've exposed the mess—now let's fix it.
From states sponsoring their own talent toAI ending the PDF printing madness Melissa
described, these aren't pipe dreams.
They're real solutions for choosingabundance over scarcity, exactly
when America needs them most.
Jerremy Newsome (00:16):
So if you had to sum this up, you can do it delicately or not.
What is working, isthere a portion of this?
You're like, man, we're crushing it here.
We're doing really great.
Melissa Harms (00:28):
I think one of my frustrations with H one Bs, and again,
I keep coming back to those 'causeit really is 70 to 80% of what we do.
One of my frustrations with those hasbeen the way they change the adjudication
standards without any sort of lawmaking.
They just say, Nope, that doesn'tcount as a specialty occupation.
When they had more lax standardsabout those H one Bs, it did work.
(00:49):
And when we didn't have this lotterysystem for H one Bs, it did work because
like I said, when companies can hire a USworker and not pay these fees, they will,
and having those, even those inflatedsalary surveys, just having some sort
of salary protection on there, it works.
What I think would work better issome sort of point system where we
(01:10):
can look at, and, other countries dothis, where we look at the individual's
education, we look at, not if it's a.
Bachelor's degree, but lookat a points, look at how long
they've worked in the industry.
Look at, how, what is theirimpact gonna be on the US economy.
Like some sort of point system wherewe capture it in a different way.
I think that could really work.
(01:30):
I think the NIW, the streamlined MIWs for cases where people really are
doing important work, we need that back.
We need some sort of way to get thesecases approved for people who are
generating money and jobs for Americans.
So that was a really
Jerremy Newsome (01:48):
No,
Brilliant.
Melissa Harms (01:49):
flaky response because there's not too much
that's working great right now.
Jerremy Newsome (01:53):
you gave me a good segue because looking at Canada's point
based immigration system, maybe you know,Australia's regional programs where it's
easier to immigrate to underpopulatedareas, you feel like that would be a
very relevant thing to make a shift into.
Melissa Harms (02:09):
I do.
And I'm definitely on themoderate side of immigration.
There are people who feel likewe should have open borders and
I don't think we can do that.
I want common sense immigrationreform, but it should make sense with
balancing the needs of US workersagainst what we need to remain relevant
the world economy and innovative.
I think that we're, especially, wehaven't really talked about this,
(02:32):
but the recent crackdown on Americanuniversities from the current
administration we're gonna lose our bestand brightest of the university setting.
And I think that's thebeginning of the end to me.
Jerremy Newsome (02:42):
Yeah.
Valid.
Talking about that.
'cause I'm a huge educational guy.
If you could the student toworker transition process.
What type of pathway would that look like?
Or how would that kind ofbe reformatted, Melissa?
Melissa Harms (02:58):
I think what would be great is to have some of these
workers work under this, like whatwe call OPT and be required to do OPT
before they transition to H but nothave them worry about the lottery.
So if they had.
Three years of work experienceunder OPT, then they didn't have
to go into the lottery because thenyou can have employers really try
(03:19):
'em out and make sure that they'rereally somebody they wanna invest in.
Because if, and I have this happenall the time, where somebody will
say, the company will say we hiredthis person, but they're just not
cutting it, so we're gonna lay 'em off.
So give them a chance to train them andfigure out if they are worth it before
they sponsor them for H one B, butdon't have it be this fear-based system
(03:39):
where I better sponsor them or they'llnever get a chance to work with me.
Jerremy Newsome (03:42):
I really enjoy kinda like what you mentioned in the sense
of there should be some type of systemapproach where you have US based
students, obviously internationalbased students obviously, but if the
internationals do wanna stay here, getvisas, get working, visas working into
a transition, like just having that be.
Grade related, right?
(04:03):
Like how do they do,how do their scores do?
What
Do?
What type of jobs are they trying to get?
And then making theemployment so much easier.
'cause that kind of blows mymind a little bit, that a company
can sponsor someone and they'rein India and it takes 12 years.
That's like the fourth of someone's life.
Melissa Harms (04:21):
Yes.
To get a green card.
Jerremy Newsome (04:22):
already said, yes, let's do this.
Melissa Harms (04:24):
I think getting back to the student I mean I think that's
where the system is broken right nowis that you do have this connection
between the schools and the employers.
We bring in these foreign studentsand we bring in a lot of them and we
bring 'em in to get educated here.
So when we're bringing 'em in toget educated here, there needs to
(04:45):
be a pathway for them to stay andimplement that education, right?
So that's why the federal government, insome ways does need to get involved in
the students and how many they're bringingover are they just bringing 'em over?
'cause they can pay full tuition.
'cause a lot of schools.
The foreign students pay more, right?
So they make a lot of moneyoff the foreign students.
Bring 'em over but then there'sgonna be no pathway for them to stay.
(05:08):
It creates this friction right there.
So that's where there needs to be.
If you are brought into a US school andyou are in that top percent to be at that
institution, then I feel like there shouldbe a way for you to stay here and work in
the us But let's not bring over, I don'teven know the numbers, but 10 million
foreign students and only have a pathwayfor 85,000 of them to stay, every year.
(05:31):
That's where I feel like the breakdownhappens is that these students
come in with the feeling that onceI graduate from here, I can stay.
Jerremy Newsome (05:37):
yeah.
That's a topic of immigration that I.
Definitely know that not a lot of peopleare discussing right now, which I'm so
happy to have you on this podcast for.
Because again, right now, especiallywith the Trump administration and it's
all about alligator Alcatraz and theundocumented and the asylum seekers.
But to that point, is a hugeportion that's affected by
(05:58):
totally different aspects.
We're like, Hey, listen, I'm working.
I pay taxes.
I'm a student.
I'm here.
I'm spending money in this economy.
I'm spending money in this country.
I have a job, I work here,and I can't even get it.
I can't stay in.
That is definitely a wild broach.
So I don't think people areeven really truly discussing.
Melissa Harms (06:19):
And expanding on that from the business students I talked to,
there's some people, these individualswith these amazing ideas and they
say to me, I wanna start a business.
I've got funding.
Can I hire myself for H one B?
We have some rules that are makingit a little easier on them, but
not great.
And it is hard.
So let's have a way for them when they'restarting a new business after graduating
(06:40):
from a top five business school forthem to be able to start it and try it.
And let's see what happens.
Maybe it's a short term, you geta five-year visa at a tryout your
business, but let's figure out away if we're gonna bring 'em in, and
they're these amazing people to have'em stay if they're gonna come here.
Jerremy Newsome (06:57):
yeah.
'Cause you talked about, theentrepreneurship route and potentially
that having some different applicationprocess or awareness process point system.
It makes sense to me.
be beyond federal reform, Melissa,and we're talking about schools too.
I was like, what can states and cities do?
Actually to help businessesaccess global talent,
Melissa Harms (07:21):
Quite frankly, there's not a lot they can do because
immigration law is all federal.
So to get these visas, they'rereally working on the federal.
I have a lot of great employers who aredoing things like helping the people on
DACA transition from DACA into an H one B.
Really trying to look at theirworkforce with a holistic view of
how can we help some of these people,asylum seekers, and maybe helping
(07:44):
with some of their fees or whatever.
Because a lot of these people who arein that other bucket I talked about
are actually working at companiesin lawful status, but they're just
in this very transitory phase.
I do encourage employers to lookat sort of ways to be helpful to
your foreign national workforceother than just sponsorship.
Jerremy Newsome (08:04):
Yeah.
And for the small businesses,Melissa, like small business owners
who needs international talent, butfears the system, what are three
practical steps that they couldtake this week, in your opinion?
Melissa Harms (08:16):
That's a really good question.
I do work with a lot ofsmall employers who are very.
They're so nervous about doing it aboutsponsoring somebody for H one B, and I
think the first thing I do is say that'susually a student that they've hired
that they wanna get an H one B for, andI just lay out the costs and say, you
just have to know these are the costs andthese are what you could be sacrificing.
(08:37):
And as long as they're willingto do that then we go forward.
And it's just honestly, find a partnerwho will, an immigration partner who will
explain everything to you very clearlyand simply about what happens next.
And it's hard to understand, but walk youthrough the whole process because that's
what we need with those smaller employers.
I do encourage all my employersto sign up for E-Verify.
(08:58):
I know it's.
It's not the best system, but itdoes show a good faith approach
to following the immigration laws.
So I think E-Verify is definitely useful.
Again, not perfect.
And then I think another thing that youwould wanna look at are some of the,
causes you can help in your community.
There are a lot of different, there's agroup I work with called Talent Beyond
(09:20):
Boundaries, and they help bring inhighly skilled workers who are working.
You might have an engineer that'sin a Syrian basement that would
like to do, electrical engineeringsomewhere very qualified, so they try
to match them up with us employers.
Look at ways like that to find talentwhere you can't find American workers.
So being a little creative andthere are a lot of great ways
(09:41):
you can help for nationals andstill help your business succeed.
Jerremy Newsome (09:45):
And then from a, let's just say even bigger front, right?
So we talked about the small guys.
If American businesses uniteon one immigration, ask
Congress, what should it be?
Melissa Harms (10:00):
I think it would be to give us a workable work visa that
captures like a point-based work visa.
I think if they could, revisit the Hone B with today's economy, today's
professions, like there are a lot ofprofessions now that do allow for a
number of different bachelor's degrees.
The bachelor's degree is aantiquated requirement in my mind.
(10:21):
Looking at your work visa andlook at it more of a point system.
And then, the lottery, makingthe lottery more equitable.
People like the individual who's beenthrough nine times, there should be some
sort of allowance given to people the moretimes they've gone through the lottery.
I don't know.
I think we can just really revisitthe work visa at this point.
Dave Conley (10:41):
So I think it was in previous episodes that we've had.
We also know that, so much ofthis is geared towards college
yet where we need to be doing.
Probably most of the hiring in the UnitedStates is in blue collar professions.
And by and large, the electricians,the concrete workers, the people
who are actually building.
Are from outside of this country.
(11:03):
So what does point-based system mean?
How does that work?
Does it say, oh, youhave a bachelor's degree?
Yes.
Or you have a, high skillset.
Yes.
What does point-based mean?
Melissa Harms (11:16):
I like those examples because I do think that there's points
for different occupations that we need.
So part of that point systemcould be based on what's the
need for that occupation.
And every year there could be some sortof indexing of where are the occupations
that are unfilled by US workers?
And those get an extra point.
(11:36):
So you could bring in people in,because that's another complaint I
have a lot, like maybe it's somebodythat's just an exceptional, very
exceptional sales, for example.
And this person's sales, like that'sprobably my most common need is
that a lot of these companies, thisguy's been selling for me from.
From abroad, and his salesnumbers are through the roof.
I wanna bring him into theUS and I'm like, no, I can't
(11:57):
get a visa for a sales guy.
No way.
No how so maybe past performance orincome or, there's just some allowance
for a lot of different factors besidesthat just being your educational degrees.
Jerremy Newsome (12:10):
I am sure AI could track that somewhere, Dave, easily.
It could be some relativelysimple database, but again, it'd
be a good opportunity as wellabout built out and tracked and
measured because that'd be cool.
Kinda like the credit system,which is also totally broken,
but it's the least trackable.
People can log in and see what's going on.
Melissa Harms (12:28):
I, I'm at large.
I'm not a fan of people from theoutside coming in to run the government.
Thinking they know morethan everybody else.
But that said, I do think there's ways youcould privatize some of this, to start a
system using real world common sense abouthow to make the immigration system work.
Jerremy Newsome (12:50):
Yeah, totally.
That's that's a huge blue oceanof opportunity in my opinion.
Just especially, and the conversationwe had last podcast was about the forms
and and helping, all the documentationneeds to happen for the undocumented
immigrants who are trying to come inand they just, they've already been here
for sec seven years and they feel right.
(13:11):
Just go through this whole process,like, how can we speed up everything
And give the ability for lawyers to, or.
Judges to just see things so much faster,articulate things, so much faster,
document things so much faster, becomeaware of the problem, the solutions so
much quicker, turn days into minutes usingsome AI scanning tools, logging tools,
(13:32):
metric tools, things of that nature.
Again, probably we privatize, butultimately is just still a product that
right now would be extremely helpful.
Melissa Harms (13:40):
Yeah I mean with, so my role with our National Lawyers
Association was with I was head of thegovernment collaboration subcommittee
of the technology innovation.
And so I worked with U-S-C-I-Sand some of the stupid stuff
that we're doing right now.
So we, when I file an H one B petition,I can file it online now, but if I
(14:00):
file an H one B work thing online, Ican't use my private case management
system that I use to get all theinformation from these people securely.
I can't use that data and hook it upto U-S-C-I-S right now, there is no
there's no way to connect those two.
Jerremy Newsome (14:17):
Crazy.
Melissa Harms (14:18):
I wanna file something electronically, I have to input the
data myself or my team does, right?
So much data.
So I don't file petitions electronically.
Now, some firms have worked around thisand used done their own sort of API
to make it work that USAS doesn't wantthem doing, but they have done that.
But USAS hasn't created APIs thatwe can use with our private system.
(14:41):
So then we have to inputeverything manually.
So that means I am stillsending paper applications
into U-S-C-I-S, which is giant.
And the way, my team is all, we all are.
We work.
In various places around the country.
So we upload, we have PDFs, everythingstored securely, and then what we
have to do is print that PDF, putit in a FedEx mailer, mail it to
(15:03):
USAS, and then U-S-C-I-S has a teamof people scanning in our paper.
Okay?
So my question was, why can't youlet us upload that PDF until you
have an API where our databasescan talk, let us upload that you
get to fire all your scanners.
(15:25):
I get to save paper and,environmental costs of the shipping.
And they promise us that by the endof fiscal year 2024 has not happened.
Has not happened.
We cannot upload an application yet.
So that's tiny.
That's a tiny idea of how badU-S-C-I-S is, they need to be.
(15:47):
U-S-C-I-S could be completelycleared out as far as I'm concerned
and start it over again, but,
Dave Conley (15:51):
And it's an extraordinarily simple change, right?
Like a, a tech team couldput that together in no time.
Even with archaic systems.
I know this because I did governmentcomputer work and I know how bad
those systems are, but somethinglike accepting A PDF and then, but
because they have to scan it backinto some system anyways is bonkers.
We had a guest last week that, for hiswife they had to take physical photos
(16:17):
down to an office of their wedding toprove that they had gotten married.
And it was like I don't evenknow where to print photos.
What would I do?
What is this?
Melissa Harms (16:27):
Yeah.
Dave Conley (16:28):
it, you've been doing this for 25 years.
25 years from now, whatwould you say we got right?
And what would you say we got wrong?
Melissa Harms (16:41):
You mean where do I see it going the next 25 years
Dave Conley (16:44):
i.
Melissa Harms (16:44):
Yeah.
I don't know.
I'm scared to answer that question becauseI think we're all very scared about the
practice of immigration law in general.
One thing, and this isn't really tothe government, but we're all very
scared of what AI is gonna do toimmigration law because, there's,
immigration is incredibly complex.
People think I just fill outa form and that's all I do.
(17:05):
But there are so manynuances to what we do.
If what we see is that kind of the dumbingdown of immigration law where people are
going to be getting in trouble 'causethey're doing things through AI and
not understanding all the implications.
So that's one that's looking at morethe practice of immigration law.
But then in terms of what I see,our country right now is being fed
(17:26):
so many, lies about immigration.
And I think what my goal is for peopleto get out of this is read the facts
on what immigration does for oureconomy, how they're not replacing us
workers, the e the economic benefits,the taxes that immigrants pay.
All of these positives aboutimmigration, our country.
(17:46):
Rich history with immigration.
We are a nation of immigrants.
And the last really bigamnesty program was by Ronald
Reagan, a Republican, in 1986.
And there were a lot of positivesout of that 1986 amnesty including my
best friend who's now a US citizen,because she was unlawful back in 1986.
No, but there's just the, for theAmerican people to get the truth
(18:10):
because I think particularly in someareas of the country people feel
like immigrants are taking away theirjobs, and that's simply not the case.
And so I think that is more whatI wanna shout from the rooftops
is get the facts out there.
Read about the economic benefits ofimmigration and how can we do this right.
Jerremy Newsome (18:29):
Yeah.
And again, I think we blend bothimmigration challenges together in
the same bucket far too often aswell, just from a media standpoint.
If you go to a county fair andstart talking to people about
immigration, they think it's justpeople coming across the borders.
They're not even thinking about thearea where you're in or the corporations
(18:50):
you're in, their business you're in.
We're like, Hey, we're hiring talent andit's a large number of people and we need
that talent 'cause we're growing, right?
The country's growing.
And to surmise it, for me, it reallycomes down to almost an abundance versus
scarcity mindset where you'll hear thatin books, you'll hear that in programs or
like your random woowoo Instagram channel.
(19:12):
But if we really think aboutthe abundance approach.
We're saying is there's more than enough.
There's more than enough to go around.
There's plenty.
And if we approach it from thescarcity of there's not enough, we
need to shrink, we need to close,we need to be scared, we need to
be worried, we need to be panicked.
There's not enough jobs.
AI's gonna take everything.
Everyone's gonna fight tooth to nail.
That's a scarcity mindset, right?
(19:33):
There isn't a post abundance, postscarcity world coming too, where
everyone has more than enough.
Everyone has opportunities like thatalso exists, and it's gonna require
some level of just bigger thinking.
And I really like that approach.
So where it's like, Hey, listen,this is adding to our economy
and the best way is imaginable.
That's what created this country after wesettled it, in the ginormous open gate of
(19:57):
all the immigrations that we allowed inthe late 18 hundreds, early 19 hundreds.
And that's what caused this countryto become massive, incredible, just
this generous, overflowing cornucopiaof the world's largest economy.
We brought everyone together andwe had that abundant mindset.
We didn't fall into the scarcity, intothe beliefs that there's not enough.
Melissa Harms (20:18):
And that said I wouldn't go so far to say open borders, but we need
a common sense approach and we do need tothink about the job market in particular,
as being, we just want it bigger.
We want it bigger and bigger.
And the more opportunities wecreate, the better off we are.
And so far, I would say over my 25years, I feel like immigration has been
a limiting factor for economic growth.
(20:40):
Particularly, everything I've seenwhen I started back in 2000, it's
like everything's gotten worse.
There's nothing where I can say,oh, this has gotten so much better.
I feel like everything has gotten worse.
That's where you, when you ask meto go 25 years in the future, I'm
like, how much worse can I get?
Jerremy Newsome (20:56):
Yeah.
We need to make some changes now.
We hope that this podcastwill at least inspire a few
thousand people to do just that.
Not only make that change,make that shift, but be aware
create maybe new policies.
As you mentioned, take somethingfrom the private sector, bring
into the governmental sector justin case it can speed up processes.
(21:16):
We've used the word archaic way too much.
We shouldn't be using it this much.
It is 20, 25.
PDFs shouldn't be mailed intoanything, anywhere, ever again.
especially for someone's livelihood,
Melissa Harms (21:30):
Yep.
Jerremy Newsome (21:30):
right?
For someone's life.
You mentioned families, children,jobs, like that's really what this is.
This is economy.
This is growing.
It does not, should not need wordarchaic shouldn't be here anymore.
And I just wanna motivate and encourageeveryone who's here and everyone who's
listening, we have opportunities.
They're all around us.
(21:51):
We just have to look for them.
We have to find them.
And Melissa, thank you for sharingyour wealth of knowledge, your
excitement, your details about thistopic, and giving us a glimmer of not
only hope, but just also solutions.
Easy implications, easy applicationsthat can be upgraded, updated, and
changed to make this a better, faster,quicker, more efficient process.
Melissa Harms (22:14):
Thanks, Jerremy.
It was a pleasure to talk to youand Dave and I look forward to
your resolution of this crisis.
Jerremy Newsome (22:21):
Thank you, Melissa.
Awesome guest.
Very informative, verysmart, great talker.
Dave Conley (22:26):
Yeah.
Jerremy Newsome (22:27):
A lot of good content.
Was able to carry a lot of stuff for us.
You asked amazing questions.
Dave Conley (22:32):
this whole thing has surprised me.
What did you learn?
Jerremy Newsome (22:35):
You know the part that intrigues me.
Is that as a country of this size, wedo just have such mundane processes
that I'm just trying to figure out why.
I know that's why Elon was like,listen, I'm just gonna come in, throw
(22:56):
a couple hundred million dollars.
I'm gonna create the Department ofGovernment efficiency and poof, we'll
have a more effective government.
And that dude who freakingblows up rockets and was
like, nah, that's too hard.
Let's make 'em sit.
Let's make 'em come back to the sameplanet, the same launch launching pad.
Let's reuse a rocket over and over.
(23:17):
guy was like, nah, this is too tough.
Dave Conley (23:19):
This,
Jerremy Newsome (23:19):
Where is this?
Dave Conley (23:21):
The guy who builds all of these incredible businesses
launches things into space like anactual rocket scientist built brand
new cars, tunnels under the ground.
The government broke him.
Jerremy Newsome (23:32):
Yeah,
Dave Conley (23:33):
yeah,
Jerremy Newsome (23:33):
in three months.
And yeah, man, I'm just like that.
Why are we doing it in such a backend?
1947, our girl, Melissa's a 25-year-oldtop tier attorney for huge, mega
businesses and is mailing in documentationthat her team is running down by hand
(23:56):
because she needs to get people's visasso they can have jobs, so they can
support their family, so they can spend.
Thousands of dollars a year on thesestupid taxes that we're probably just
throwing away at people for no reason.
That's what I'm learning, man.
I'm excited to fix and update a lotof these challenges and problems
because I know it's possible.
I know it's doable and it's justconnecting with, I love that she
said the word, the private market.
(24:18):
I am on the exact opposite end ofthat discussion where I think the
privatized sector is where we'veprobably fixed most of the government.
And I don't believe that thegovernment shouldn't be people that
are not probably a double negative.
They should be filled with peoplewho did come from the private
sector, who just were citizens.
We're like, Hey, I've donesome really cool things.
(24:38):
Now my money's figured out.
For the most part, I'm not gonnatake a bunch of money from other
countries or corporations orcompanies to make my lifestyle better.
'cause that's obviously illegaland I shouldn't be doing that.
So I'm just gonna be a publicservant and just make this stuff
run better and quicker, efficient.
My job is to literally sit down andfigure how to solve this problem
within this domain that I'm focused on.
(25:00):
I do not think that immigration shouldbe as federally overwhelming as it is.
I think I've mentioned that before.
I think there should be otherdepartments, other governments, other
efficiencies that should also be handlingthat where it's not the deporter in
chief, Obama, or it's not Trump whoare like, this is not the way it is.
And now I have the 16th largestmilitary in the world ICE all this.
(25:22):
And we're not spending timeto make it quicker, more
efficient and less militaristic.
And that just seems weird to me.
And this is a very fascinating topic.
And again, it is one of the ones to meand many of them have been for sure.
But this is one where I'm like, wow.
Wow.
We wow.
It affects so many people, soblatantly every single day.
yes, education and my main componentdoes affect people daily, but it's
(25:47):
also gonna be something that'sgonna be longer term effects, right?
Like when you study.
Taxes and we study the stock market.
When we study money and we study financeand we study health, those are effects
that do prolong themselves, right?
They take weeks, months, maybe even years,but this is one that's been affecting
people for decades and will continue toaffect people for decades, but affects
people in everyday life right now, ona big scale, no one is seemingly doing
(26:13):
anything about it, and it's quite wild.
That's what I learned.
Hand it over.
Dave Conley (26:19):
Okay.
What did I learn?
I learned that we spend all ofour time talking about illegal and
alligator alley and deportationsand all of the money goes to that.
Yet this topic, legal,immigration, people wanting jobs.
This should be the number one discussionpoint when it comes to immigration.
it's fear mongering.
(26:41):
in comparison to this.
These are people who are building theeconomy, building the next stuff, building
the things that we need in this country.
Pathways to citizenship, pathwaysto, blue collar jobs and the people
who we need to build this country.
I think that this legal immigrationthing needs to be the number one
thing that we're talking about.
(27:02):
And in a way, I think thatsolves the undocumented
All of these people are here fora lot of different reasons, but
primarily, we've learned that alot of it's economically driven.
you want to be in the United States.
These are the people who arebuilding our homes and building our
Jerremy Newsome (27:19):
Yep.
Dave Conley (27:20):
and harvesting food and all those things.
And so the, this discussionneeds to be about.
Jobs and business and economicsand what's right for America.
And I think that solves theillegal immigration part of this.
So I think that we arefocused on the wrong things.
the second thing I learned is I thinkstates should be pretty involved.
Jerremy Newsome (27:43):
Yeah, dude.
Like
Over here.
So I asked a question and after Iasked, I was like, am I an idiot?
Dave Conley (27:50):
I
Jerremy Newsome (27:50):
for asking that question?
'cause she's right.
Dave Conley (27:52):
bonkers.
Jerremy Newsome (27:52):
federal, but there's no one going into the federal government
from an immigration standpoint.
It's a hundred percentstates that get affected.
That's it.
Who else?
Dave Conley (28:02):
And it's different for.
Jerremy Newsome (28:04):
Each state.
Dave Conley (28:05):
states like Arizona, Texas Florida, California.
There's different needs,different aspects to this.
Like why aren't states sponsoring theseH one visas or they have their own visa?
It's okay, yeah, but yougotta work in California.
Oh, boohoo.
I think would be even more valuableis rural, we've talked about this
(28:26):
with housing, like rural communitysponsoring people to be like,
come on in, we got plenty of land.
Jerremy Newsome (28:31):
Yep.
Dave Conley (28:32):
jobs to fill.
It's come on.
We welcome you, rather than the wholeeating our dogs, eating the cats thing.
It's no, come to America and workin our rural hospitals and work in
our, I think states should be deeplyinvolved and there's a disproportionate
impact for states like Texas.
So they're gonna have different,they're gonna have different.
Problems too.
(28:53):
And Texas has different problemsthan Florida, even though we both
have a high immigrant population,so states need to be involved.
And then the last part on the solutionthing is that this thing hasn't really
substantively been touched since 1965, andthen again in the eighties and a little
bit, under DACA with President Obama.
(29:15):
This thing is a patchwork of mess,mainly designed by special interest,
probably, like being very protectionistand they don't know what left
hand is affecting the right hand.
So that's created this Byzantine thing.
And politicians, which we've said overand over again, know nothing about this.
And the people that do know it.
(29:36):
Need to be designing these systems.
Those are business people and thoseare the immigrants themselves.
And we get those two groups togetherin a public private partnership
with saying, okay, are the thingsthat we need to build in America.
These are the social aspects ofthis, and these are the immigrants
and immigrant experiences.
We'd have a really sane immigration plan.
(29:57):
We talked about likethe points-based system.
Like I am sure that a sane immigrationplan that isn't open to all the borders
and isn't nobody comes in, come out ofthis because what we have now is, again,
medieval, we're gonna keep saying that.
Jerremy Newsome (30:13):
Team, if this is firing you up as much as it is myself
and Dave Conley, let just promote thisepisode, promote this entire podcast.
Do what you can, and hit uswith those five star reviews.
Listen, if you've got a 14-year-oldson that has a phone, take it from him.
up the podcast, click that fivestar review, write a quick review.
The more reviews, the more stars that weget, the more people that will listen.
(30:35):
The bigger the audience.
The bigger the audience, the moresolutions that we will not only
think about, know about, hear about,but we will be able to create.
You can find us, solve USAPod on X or solving America's
Problems podcast Instagram.
We are gonna still be here.
We're gonna continue to pour into you.
Thank you so much for being a listener.
You rock.
Popular Podcasts
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show
The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show. Clay Travis and Buck Sexton tackle the biggest stories in news, politics and current events with intelligence and humor. From the border crisis, to the madness of cancel culture and far-left missteps, Clay and Buck guide listeners through the latest headlines and hot topics with fun and entertaining conversations and opinions.
The Charlie Kirk Show
Charlie is America's hardest working grassroots activist who has your inside scoop on the biggest news of the day and what's really going on behind the headlines. The founder of Turning Point USA and one of social media's most engaged personalities, Charlie is on the front lines of America’s culture war, mobilizing hundreds of thousands of students on over 3,500 college and high school campuses across the country, bringing you your daily dose of clarity in a sea of chaos all from his signature no-holds-barred, unapologetically conservative, freedom-loving point of view. You can also watch Charlie Kirk on Salem News Channel