James Pittman: Welcome to Immigration Uncovered, the docket wise video podcast. I'm James Pittman. This is episode 34, and we're here today with Gil Guerra, who is an up and coming immigration policy analyst at the Niskanen Center. Gil, welcome to the program.

Gil Guerra: Thanks so much for having me, James.

James Pittman: Gil, can you tell us, like, to get started, share a little bit about your journey and what led you to specialize in immigration policy?

Gil Guerra: Sure. So my parents immigrated from Mexico in the 19 nineties, and I grew up primarily in Mississippi and Wisconsin, which are not the traditional states for Mexican immigrants. The foreign born share of the population in Mississippi around the 2000s was 0.94%, which was the 3rd lowest in the country. So I became intensely interested from a very early age in questions about assimilation, about American identity. And I went into college and really found an interest in foreign policy. And I think like many people, I was really forward by the events of that time, which were the 2016 election, the Trump term, and also the transition in foreign policy from the era of the global war on terror to the era of great power competition with China. And so as I was sort of holding these 2 separate thoughts in my head of assimilation and foreign policy, I became really interested in the arguments that foreign policy, and immigration abstractly, interacts and benefit the United States, in certain ways. If you look at our demographics, for example, currently, our birth rate is 1.7, which is below the replacement rates of 2.1, but China and Russia have it even worse. China's birth rate is 1.8. Russia's birth rate is 1.49. So I became very interested in the ways that immigration is, a long term solution for this in the sense that we are uniquely able to bring people from all over the world, from all different socioeconomic and religious backgrounds, and have them within a generation really feel like part of the American social fabric in a way that China and Russia simply can't. You know, if you are in China and you're not Han Chinese or if you're in Russia and you're not Orthodox Russian, you think you really struggle to see yourself as part of the political project there. So following that, I became more interested in concrete ways that immigration policy could be used, more directly, as a tool of American foreign policy. I was really influenced in my undergraduate studies by the work of Kelly Greenhill on weaponized migration. And then in my graduate studies on the work by, Fiona Adamson and Hirasimos Tsarapas on, migration diplomacy. So that's, the crux of what I study at the Niskanen Center here is immigration and foreign policy, questions about assimilation trends, at the US border with Mexico. And I think, you know, I'm really lucky to be able research these questions at the Niskan Center, which is a relatively new and nonpartisan think tank. It was founded, in 2015. So we're coming up on our 10 year anniversary. And large part because I think by being new, it's not necessarily as bound by some of the ideological strictures and receives consensus thinking that occasionally proliferates here in Washington DC.

James Pittman: What are some of the key projects you've worked on at the Niskanen Center related to immigration policy?

Gil Guerra: Great. So I would organize some around, three themes. I hope you get to talk about all 3 in our time today. The first is imagining what immigration policy would look like if we reoriented it to compete more firmly with our rivals, and by that, I mean, particularly China. So a lot of my recent work has been looking at irregular Chinese migration, especially considering the geopolitical impacts, that it could have, in the future. But beyond that, my latest piece is also on instituting a new exchange program, a new cultural exchange program, targeting populations around the globe where the US is really competing with China, for soft power influence. But beyond that, I think that oftentimes when we talk about immigration policy, especially in recent years, it oftentimes is laden with a negative undertone. I think that we sometimes lose sight of the ways in which it can be beneficial. So a lot of my work, in the second strand has to do with using immigration policy to reward allies. So some of that is, for example, a proposal to expand the use of c one d visas by, Colombians, through the Safe Mobility Offices Initiative. But I'm also proud of the work, that I've done on arguing for the inclusion of Uruguay, which is another one of our regional allies, another regional pro US country, and to the visa waiver program. And beyond that, the 3rd strand is making sure that immigration policy benefits the most vulnerable Americans. I think that's one of the main selling points of immigration and immigration policy is that we bring, for example, really high-tech workers here who innovate, who create economic dynamism, but I think that we oftentimes overlook the ways in which immigration policy actually helps working class Americans, Americans who are vulnerable. So some of that has been through the Conrad 30, physician waiver program, which connects, international medical graduates with rural and underserved communities, and also expanding the j one au pair program, to elder care to provide for the elder care shortage, that unfortunately many elderly Americans are facing.

James Pittman: Okay. Wonderful. Let's we'll we'll get to all of those. Now let's first start with the article that you had in Bloomberg about Chinese migration at the US Mexico border. So can you provide an overview of your research findings, Tom?

James Pittman: And before I

Gil Guerra: before we get into, you know, the why of, these, new way Chinese migrants are coming, I think it's important to establish, at the at the outset, the what's and the how, because the why necessarily involves a great amount of conjecture. So since last April, there have been 45,369 encounters with Chinese nationals at the US Mexico border, which is quite an increase because before the pandemic between January of 2019, January of 2020, there were only 590 encounters. So that's a pretty large and pretty interesting increase, I would say. And the peak really started, around, December of 2023. We reached a high of 5,980 encounters. But before that, the trend itself goes back, I would think, to April of 2022. But it's important to put those numbers in the context because it's easy to hear 45,000 encounters with Chinese migrants. The overall, they only make up 2% of the overall number of southern border encounters that we've experienced, in the fiscal year to date. At the same time, though, there is obviously a larger geopolitical concern and consideration around Chinese migration. And how they get here is also for me, a matter of great interest. It is what most of my research focuses on. So most of the Chinese migrants first enter via Ecuador, which they do because Ecuador is one of a handful of countries that does not require visas for Chinese nationals. The other one in the mainland Western Hemisphere is Suriname, which is much more difficult to travel to. There are a handful of Caribbean nations, that are also more difficult to travel to, and then proceed on onwards from the US. So the majority of them transit through Ecuador, to begin with. So my research has really been focusing on analyzing the Ecuadorian Statistical Registry of International Entries and Exits, which contains, wide amount of data about, these, entrants, from China, including their hometowns, including gender, age, occupation, stated mode of travel. So essentially, I've managed to, collate, all of that data, summarize it, analyze it, and have found, lots of very interesting things, based on that research.

James Pittman: So, Gil, what are the main factors driving the recent increase in Chinese nationals crossing the US Mexico border?

Gil Guerra: Sure. So I think that there are 3 things, that have been borne out by the state. The first point that I would make would be political repression. In both years that I've looked at, 2022 and 2023, Hong Kong and the province of Xinjiang, which is in the west and which is a majority Muslim province, currently experiencing a great deal of repression, were both overrepresented as areas of origin for Chinese travelers to Ecuador, which to me was a pretty surprising find, in some ways, especially because I think the religious persecution angle of these migrants has not been covered or not really been borne out by reporting until very recently. So it's interesting to see that reflected there. You know, I think that even if you are not, say, someone who is, a persecuted minority within one of these, two areas, it's easy to see, for example, one of the last major mosques this week in Xinjiang, recently had its, spires removed by the Chinese governments to make it better conform with traditional Chinese architecture styles. So it's pretty easy to see why people from those regions would be leaving. I think the economy had quite a lot to do with it also. Thai's economy has recovered very, very slowly since the COVID 19 pandemic. And what you see is that a lot of the people who are coming, about 80% of them are either high or middle skilled workers. There's no representation of engineers, of small shop owners, within this group. So a lot of them are people who had enough funds to essentially be able to start over here in the US. And the declining regions in China's Rust Belt and the Northeast, are especially overrepresented. So a lot of it, I think, is being driven by the middle class in these regions, who no longer see an economic future for themselves. But beyond that, I think that there has always been, to some degree, an economic or a political motive, for migration. That does not necessarily fully explain the dramatic increase here. For me, the biggest factor is really social media because for as long as immigration has happened to the US, it's always started through channels of communication. People came over and they had a father or they had an uncle or they had a neighbor or a family friends who told them not only how to get here, but how to get a job once they got here. So it was really limited to those sorts of modes of communication for the most part. But now what we have is through the explosion in video media, especially, if you think about how social media progressed, we started off with, say, Facebook, which is mostly text based, moved on to Instagram, which is picture based. Now everything, no matter what platform you're on, the algorithms, all really reward video, video content. And so now you can literally go on TikTok or Doinyin and watch videos of other people, from your country, make the video make the journey, via Ecuador, transit through the Darien Gap, go through all of Central America through Mexico, HCS border, and then film content about their lives once they reach there. And so if you see that, you very likely think, okay. Well, I can do that too. The more people do that, the more videos are created, the easier the route gets, the more specialized shops and services, and routes, been completed. So I think that's had a really interesting and exponential impact on this particular wave of migration in ways that I don't think we've fully grappled repression by the

James Pittman: Communist Party of China contribute to this wave of migration? Sure. So I think that's

Gil Guerra: on that, it's very difficult, for me to separate those 2. I think that one of the things that's commonly said about these migrants, for example, is that they're economic migrants. I think people say that, again, because they see that they're primarily from the middle class, primarily, again, shop owners or engineers who are coming here purely for work and not for anything else. It's very difficult, obviously, because the translation services are limited. But I do think that it's it's for me, it's very hard to separate the 2 because I think that the CCP's political repression, in many ways has led to its economic stagnation, and has played a very significant part in why those migrants are also leaving. So as far as which one weighs more, it's difficult to say there. Again, for me, the really key factor is social media as, a facilitating tool, for making it easier for these migrants to make the journey.

James Pittman: Well, what are some of the security concerns raised by the growing presence of Chinese migrants at the US Mexico border?

Gil Guerra: Right. I think one of the main narratives that's come out of this phenomenon has been, essentially the accusation that these migrants are en masse some sort of a secret spy army. You see the phrase military age males thrown around quite a bit. And that reflects, I think, in some ways, the true characteristic that most of these migrants are young and are male, based on the data that I looked at. About 75% of Chinese travelers to Ecuador were men, and about 55% were between 1539. But first, let's think about why they're young and male. And I think it really has to do again with the nature of the journey itself. Again, if you're motivated primarily by what you're seeing on social media, if you're also motivated by your ability to sort of start a new life, you're more likely to be young, both to have those aspirations, but also overall those technological capabilities. The journey itself is also very physically grueling. If you think about, you know, if you tomorrow had to fly into Ecuador and then transit by foot, by bus, through the Darien Gap, through all of Central America, through very dangerous countries. It's a very grueling journey. It's certainly not for the faint of heart, no matter how well equipped you are. So I think that's in large part explains, in addition to China's surplus male population, why so many of them are doing that. But let's say you're not convinced by that. I just I don't think that thinking through the logic of it, the mass spy theory makes sense. And I'm not an expert on, counterintelligence or on Chinese on Chinese spying. I certainly do think that they have had ways in which they have abused our immigration system before. But the ways that they've done that, for example, the Wall Street Journal has an article on Chinese tourists who come here, again, on legal tourist visas, and then basically try to walk up to and take pictures of US military bases. You know, if you the Chinese simply wanted to get someone into the US to conduct some sort of espionage, getting them in is not necessarily a problem that they face. They don't have a travel ban currently or frankly, even as much suspicion entering the country as, say, someone from Russia would. You know, they constitute a very large percentage of our skilled workforce, of students or higher education programs. That's not something out there that's necessarily struggling with. Well, let's say that they do want to get someone in through the southern border. The entire logic of that would be to have someone here who would be entirely evading US detection. So they would fly in in assets for, let's say, between 20 to $60,000 per head to Quito, have them transit to the dairy gap, which is a lawless and incredibly dangerous place, Up in transit through Central America, many parts of which they're all also at the mercy of criminal gangs. Have been transferred to Mexico at all points. There are bribes happening. You're not you can't really guarantee the safety of this asset. And then you have them come to the US Mexico border and have them present themselves for asylum where we take biographic data from them, and where they are also completely at the whims of US Customs and Border Protection. It doesn't make sense to me, in that sense. And, you know, the final counterfactual I would make, even if those 2, explanations don't convince you that this is not, at least on mass, a very serious security threat, is that at the moment, China has been really deepening its ties with Nicaragua, and Nicaragua has been taking steps to facilitate irregular immigration into the US. Cuba and Venezuela have also been doing this, but Cuba and Venezuela have been using their own domestic populations. Because if you start in Venezuela, you have to cross the area gap. And if you start in Cuba, you have to contend with the sea, which is a much more dangerous route to the US. If you sort of Nicaragua, it's a pretty straight shot comparatively to the US Mexico border.

Gil Guerra: So Nicaragua has signed visa free treaties recently with Angola and with Qatar as a means of facilitating irregular immigration to the US. That they have not done so for China indicates to me, especially when that would be much more economically beneficial for them, especially when if China wanted them to, it's pretty clear to me that they would do it. That to me indicates that the Chinese are also at a loss of what to do about this wave of migration, as much, if not more, as the US authorities.

James Pittman: Alright. Well, shifting, a little bit, Gil, to the US politics. How do Republicans and Democrats differ in their responses to this increase in Chinese migrants on the southern border?

Gil Guerra: Well, I think that the response from the Republican party has been a lot more interested, you could say charitably, but certainly a lot more concerns, overall. I, myself, again, have some reservations or have, I think, healthy level, of skepticism about the Chinese Communist Party. I have no doubts that they do want to exploit our immigration system. But I think that the approach taken currently by many Republicans, again, to, on mass label these migrants as spies, not only reflects an ugly history, in many ways that the US has had of discriminating against Chinese migrants, is also, for me, counterproductive, from the standpoint of countering China. There's a report out, by the Wilson Center called the Diaspora and China Sport Influence Activities by Audrey Wong, which shows that China really does lean very heavily on trying to use its diaspora in several countries for espionage activities. But despite that, has not been successful. However, one of the things that does help them overall is the perception that the countries that these types migrants find themselves in are xenophobic, in some ways don't want them, aren't really suspicious of them, will ever fully trust them. If that's the message you're sending and that's what you're starting with, I think it actually makes it easier, for China eventually to, recruit some of these ATRA members as, intelligence agents. So I think it's much better, for example, to leads not necessarily, with trust, but to try to verify, again, information about, who these people are, where they're coming from, and start from there without making, baseless accusations.

James Pittman: There are some who think that this the Chinese Communist Party sees every Chinese living abroad as a potential agent that they can activate if needed. I mean, that's obviously an exaggeration, but, to to what extent do you think there's some truth in that notion?

Gil Guerra: Well, I think it's certainly true that they will try to put a lot of pressure. I do think that the Chinese Communist Party does see, the Chinese diaspora that way. That does not mean that the Chinese diaspora sees the Chinese Communist Party that way. I think that, you know, in many ways, one of the things that I find, again, as someone who is very skeptical of the tiniest communist party, so what's frustrating about this, narrative is that we just trust and assume the CCP's assertion that they are able to flip, you know, basically every member of their diaspora, and we sort of trust their view of humanity, which I think is, again, a lot more ethnocentric, than most Americans, would would have themselves. So I find that's, general approach. Again, I think it's important to be aware of it, and I think it's important to find ways to counteract with, but I certainly don't think that it's accurate.

James Pittman: Now how do you address concerns about dangerous rhetoric while discussing the security risks related to Chinese migration?

Gil Guerra: Well, again, I think that it's important to not, make statements calling the Chinese, migration that's happening, some sort of an invasion, or overall some sort of a spy wave. And I think that, again, it's it's also important to be very clear and very honest about what is happening and to put those numbers again into context as I did. It is, an interesting phenomenon. It isn't a phenomenon that we ought to keep an eye on. Again, it is 2% of of overall migration. So I think that is something that is important to keep in mind when discussing this. It's also important because you oftentimes, again, see photos on social media of large groups of Chinese men lined up at the border, And people oftentimes miss that they are lining up because they are lining up to present themselves for asylum. They're running up to turn themselves in to agents of the US government, who again can make decisions, and declarations whether or not to let them in or to let them go or to detain them. Right? So they're not surreptitiously trying to get into the border. They're very much trying to present asylum claims and oftentimes have very high rates of success of pursuing those claims as well.

James Pittman: Have you formulated any policy recommendations to manage this wave of migrations?

Gil Guerra: I think more than anything else, we need to have a well functioning refugee system. Mhmm. In fiscal year 2023, we admitted a total of 15 refugees from China. If you consider the numbers, we got 45,000 to 15. That's clearly, not enough. There are 2 acts of legislation, that would help, sort of speed this along. The first is the Uighur Human Rights Protection Act, which would designate Uighurs and other ethnic groups being persecuted in Xinjiang as refugees of special humanitarian concern, which would subsequently make them eligible for priority 2 processing and the refugee resettlement system, which would in turn allow them to access the US refugee program without a referral from the UNHCR, an embassy, or an NGO. And the Hong the Hong Kong Safe Harbor Act, would also give some reservations to refugees from Hong Kong, who are democratic activists. So those are 2 legislative solutions. But again, I think that's a lot of this, you know, can be ameliorated by increasing transparency, not only from the US governments. I think that we could have more data again about who these migrants are. We could be more transparent about whether or not we have or we are changing the questionings, that are happening for Chinese migrants at the border, but, again, also from the US news media in terms of, by these migrants telling their stories and telling them responsibly.

James Pittman: You spoke of social media as a facilitator. Now do do you do you see that as an overarching trend that is present in migration from any other countries facing political repression, or are there any other overarching trends similar to what you've seen with the migrants from China that you think also apply to other countries?

Gil Guerra: For me, the other really interesting case, that can serve as, a contrast in some ways, to the Chinese migration is India, which shows a much more regional distribution. Mhmm. So Indian migration has also, climbs, very much the US Mexico border. They are both concentrated, to a large degree in the San Diego sector, which is also, very atypical for the ways in which migration flows have typically happened, to the US. Part of it is social media. A lot of it and, again, this is a way in which I think migration is being shaped by really fascinating and unpredictable trends. What happened is that in India and the North, land prices and the majority six states of Punjab and Haryana spiked. So a lot of farmers suddenly were sitting on very valuable lands, and there being, again, diaspora communities in the US. A lot of these rural communities wound up selling a parcel of their land or some of their lands in order to pay for the 15, 30, $40,000 journey, for their sons, typically their sons, or sometimes their entire families to make the journey to the US and present themselves to the US, sort of at the US border, but to make an asylum claim. Now for me, part of what is interesting about this also, going forward, there was the assassination recently of the Sikh dissidents Hardeep Najjar in Canada. It's been alleged based on intelligence provided, by another member of the Five Eyes, intelligence group that the Indian government was directly involved in the assassination of that Sikh dissidents. And so now you have all of a sudden for US India relations, a large number of Sikh migrants who are pursuing themselves at the southern border to make asylum claims where they are claiming that they are being persecuted for being Sikh, in India. And the US government's obviously not an official level, but on some lower level is at least, granting those claims a certain degree of credibility. And the people who I've talked to who are professional India researchers and watchers don't think that this, will be a real issue in US India relations in the long term. But I do think it shows some of the complications that are increasingly revising, from this forward migration, in ways in which that again, if you study only foreign policy or only immigration policy, it's very easy to miss, against some of the implications that arise when the 2 clash like that.

James Pittman: Let's move along to your another article, which was about the c one and d visa, and how it can provide a legal pathway to work for qualified migrants. So can you elaborate a little bit I mean, tell us in general about your thesis and elaborate on the goals of the safe mobility offices

Gil Guerra: premise of the, the premise of the article was expanding the use of, c one d visas at these safe mobility offices. And the theory behind the safe mobility offices, is basically that migrants make several stops along the way to the US Mexico border. There are several really crucial areas of transits. So we currently have, an SMO or a safe mobility office, in Ecuador, which is AP, area of transits, for migrants coming in from further South America, such as Peru, Bolivia. There's one in Colombia, which again is the stop right before the Darien Gap, which is one of the more harrowing parts of the journey.

Gil Guerra: There's one in Costa Rica, which is a relatively safe country, where migrants again, having made the durian gap, may be dissuaded, may wanna stop. There's one in Guatemala, also, which is, in the northern triangle, before the migrants formally entered Mexico. And the idea behind these safe mobility offices is that they would be able to divert irregular immigration flows by offering in conjunction with other countries, other agencies, for example, potential labor pathways to say Canada or Spain. And our idea with the c one d visa was to, expand, the offering of that, at the Colombian Assamo because Colombia is strategically well placed. It has a, port town in Cartagena that is already regionally a popular, cruise destination. It has access to the Panama Canal cruise routes, as well. And Colombia in general is one of our most important regional allies. We rely very heavily on them, not only for assistance with security of the region, but also with migratory management in the region. So it's also a way, of, essentially, thanking them for their cooperation with us and trying to, make it clear with other countries that if you cooperate with us, we will also do what we can, to create regular pathways, for citizens, to be able to get advantage of.

James Pittman: Mhmm. Now let's talk a little bit about what the SMOs actually are for anyone who's not familiar with it. I mean, who operates them and what are their functions?

Gil Guerra: Sure. The SMOs are essentially, operated multilaterally. There are countries, presence. Again, the US government is there. There's the ION, the IOM, there's UNHCR, who is present. And essentially, again, they offer alternative, labor pathways for migrants making their way, towards the US. Some of those, again, are in, Canada or in Spain. They also offer services, oftentimes for migrants from Cuba, Nicaragua, Venezuela, or Haiti, who are interested in doing the parole program there. So, again, they, primarily serve and are used to divert flows of irregular migration.

James Pittman: K. So they have, say, state department visa officers there?

Gil Guerra: I am not entirely sure.

James Pittman: Okay. Alright. Well, what role do you envision the c one d visa playing in this context of migration management? Why do you believe that the c one d visa is an underutilized resource?

Gil Guerra: Right. So the c one d visa, just to, you know, talk more specifically about what it is, the c one d visa is a combination visa that allows qualified migrants to enter the US temporarily to work abroad commercial sea vessels, primarily cruises. So the c one visa allows for transits, and the d visa allows for work abroad, aboard a commercial vessel or airline. So, typically, this goes to anyone from a sea vessel captain to a daiquan to a lifeguard, or to a hook. It's typically fairly rarely used as far as, again, in this, in this context using of, say, the h two a agricultural visa when we think of sort of short term, labor visas. But I think that is especially well suited to countries like Colombia. They, again, have access to ports, have access, already to a preexisting cruise industry, is one that I think, in part because the cruise, season is so much more temporal, because the work is, oftentimes shorter, than, say, even an agricultural season is. And because the sponsor oftentimes more limited, it doesn't get quite as much attention, but can still provide jobs to, you know, 1,000 if not tens of thousands, of people who are searching for it.

James Pittman: Now let's talk about some of the challenges that these SMOs might face in implementing the Visa program. I mean, do you see any obstacles in in making wider use of this program?

Gil Guerra: Right. So I, recently had a conversation with one of the ambassadors of, one of the countries that has an SMO. And I can't say which because it was off the record. But essentially, you know, the impression that I got is that they are a good idea in theory. In practice, they are very small. They are relatively understaffed. But, also, you know, if you have already left your home and you have made a plan to reach the US and you have a family member there waiting for you or you have potentially some sorts of job that you think that you can do waiting there for you, you're not going to suddenly, upend that, and go to Canada or Spain instead. For example, some of the jobs have English language requirements, that many of the migrants, also struggle to meet. And in general, also, the waiting process takes quite a bit. And so some of the countries I mentioned, that have the, visas are safe.

Gil Guerra: Yeah. Costa Rica, for example, is one of them where you would be safe to wait there. But, you know, trying to wait in, say, Ecuador currently, which has, a renewed wave of gang violence, is undergoing a security crackdown, waiting in Colombia, again, waiting in Guatemala, have which have their own crime problems and their own history of sort of armed, organized gangs makes it, a very difficult choice to stay and wait there for months for the hope, but not guarantee of some sort of legal pathway.

James Pittman: And how do you see the collaboration between the various stakeholders such as the host countries, UNHCR, the IOM, enhancing the effectiveness of the SMOs?

Gil Guerra: Well, I think that having those different stakeholders, I think, makes it so that oftentimes, what's you tried what you what what a sensitivity is I think in Latin America is that the US by being the regional hegemon, frequently, I think, when it tries to get smaller Latin American countries to cooperate with our immigration priorities can sometimes be seen as overbearing, if not outright imperialistic. And so I think by actually both making these Latin American countries partners, by, you know, making it so they're not simply carrying out our immigration priorities for us, but are actually playing an active part in it. And also by having, again, the presence of external countries, again, Canada, Spain, as well as multilateral bodies. I think that for countries that want to work with us, but might be somewhat wary of the stigma, again, of US involvement in Latin America and the sheer weight that we carry, in the region, and not wanting to be seen as necessarily, you know, of sequence to that. I think that's, that helps from that angle, and I think also, again, makes it so that we can offer a more diverse range of pathways. It makes it so that the approach overall we're taking to migration managements is more regional, and more collaborative, instead of solely bilateral.

James Pittman: Let's talk about the benefits, the economic benefits, the social benefits for both the migrants and the host countries and especially Colombia if the c one d, visa program were to be expanded through the SMS?

Gil Guerra: Sure. Well, there's an estimated, 13,500,000 cruise ships that are going to be, or 13,500,000 passengers on cruises this summer. The cruise industry has bounced back. But, again, this is something that I think you see replicated across a variety of industries after COVID, which is that people are trying to build these industries back up, but there's a real shortage of labor for them afterwards because a lot of people moved on to different jobs. A lot of people wound up moving out for the pandemic. And so for countries in the region like Colombia that rely on tourism, that is something that I think winds up being a benefit. I think it also winds up being a benefit for Colombia, again, in the sense that they don't necessarily suffer, brain drain via this program. They don't necessarily suffer a mass exodus of the young people. And so their young people work on cruises, acquire English language skills, oftentimes acquire new job training. You know, they may enter, say, as a bartender, but wind up, learning different skills, on the cruise, and also get exposed, again to different, different areas of American life. So from a soft power perspective, being able to again interact, with us without necessarily having to, step foot, in the US, is something that's, I think is beneficial for both parties.

James Pittman: Alright. Well, you know, it's a very interesting premise. And, do you think that it's gaining traction, the the the notion that the expansion of this this, c one d visa program is would be so beneficial? Do you see that gaining traction?

Gil Guerra: I haven't heard, much about it. It's, sort of being picked up. But, you know, one of the things that I think, is important in immigration policy, and this is a point made by, Justin Guest, who is a professor, at George Mason University, is that oftentimes the things in immigration policy that are low salience are the ones that actually wind up being passed because, you know, if tomorrow we offer c one d visas, you know, for Columbia Nationals in particular, There's not going to be a crowd outside Joe Biden's, office or outside the white now. Hanging for us. Saying, how how dare you offer, expansion of c one d visas? And, you know, similarly, there's not going to be a mass swing. You know, he's not going to win, say, the Colombian American vote by 90 points now because he passed this. But for the people on the grounds, who better in Colombia, who are regional partners, and especially for the people who wind up paying these jobs, and for the overall, I gotta redirection of regular migration that matters quite a bit.

James Pittman: Right. It's a low hanging fruit and potentially a quick win if it could be done. Right. Now the next article that I wanna talk about is the Conrad 30 Waiver Program. So the premise here is, that it is a bipartisan immigration policy that helps rural Americans get access to local physicians. So please explain how the CONRAD 30 waiver program specifically addresses physician shortages in rural and underserved areas.

Gil Guerra: So, typically, after graduating from an American medical school, foreign graduates have to leave and return to their home countries, for a set period of years before they can, come back and practice in the United States. And that's obviously a major disruption to their careers. It's also a way in which we may wind up losing, quite a number of, of physicians. So the Conrad waiver program essentially works by giving every state 30 waivers that they can then offer to physicians. The physicians have to serve in a, medically designated underserved area, typically a rural area as well. So these are, again, areas in which there's a physician shortage, in which there's a health care shortage. And essentially, the physician winds up working, in that area for also a set period of time. And then after that is your practice wherever they like. They don't have to if they've obviously regularized for migration status, they're able to, to move around, but they're essentially able to avoid that disruption to their career, by serving through this waiver program.

James Pittman: And what are some of the problems or challenges that Conrad 30 waiver program currently faces? And how about the proposed legislation? How does it aim to address these issues?

Gil Guerra: One of the problems is that the Conrad 30 program has to be continually reauthorized, every 3 years. So if you are a hospital, say, or even if you're a physician yourself and you're trying to plan out, again, your career or you're trying to plan out, your, overall workforce needs, having to wonder whether or not you will have the waivers necessary to fill some of those roles, creates a level of uncertainty that makes planning difficult. The overall number, 30 waivers per state is also something that, creates, in some ways, is is inadequate for many of the state's needs. Many states wind up hitting all 30. Obviously, not all states do, but that is something that since you consider the overall number of physicians who could want them, the overall population, the numbers of the physician shortfall currently, that's something that's, the program currently struggles quite a bit with.

James Pittman: So how does the Conrad 30 physician access reauthorization act improve upon the original Conrad 30 program, particularly in terms of the benefits for rural communities?

Gil Guerra: So it increases the number of slots, for every state from 30 to 35, provided that 90% of the waivers available to the states, are used, overall. So that continues to scale up with use, but essentially allows for even more physicians to practice, in these, underserved areas. So that's that's one of the main, benefits, of it. Currently, it also clarifies there's a dual intent issue, essentially with these visas. And, you know, by that, I mean that j one visas, are not dual intent. So they are, solely visitor or exchange visas, and recipients can't apply for an immigrant visa, a customer status, or an APRL visa automatically after their service are completed. So this also, clarifies that's, dual intense issue by clarifying that if you express interest and are receiving a future Colorado 30 waiver, it doesn't make you, ineligible in the long run.

James Pittman: Right. That's super important for medical graduates. Absolutely. So what role do you broader broadly speaking, what role do you see international medical graduates playing in the future American health care, especially in the context of the physician shortfall predicted by the AAMC?

Gil Guerra: Right. Well, one of the interesting things for me is that if you look at the overall specialties that these medical graduates participate in, they are lowest in things like, plastic surgery, like sports science, and they are the highest, in geriatric medicine. That's one of the highest fields that they have. They're over 50% of geriatric medicine practitioners. And again, if you think back to the birth rate numbers that I mentioned, the US's overall demographic, pyramid, we're going to have a lot of old people, very quickly here in the US. And, again, we're going to need a larger workforce to be able to, care for them, not only at home, but also in the hospital. And, you know, the fact that so many international medical graduates are coming here and are specializing in geriatric medicine is something that I think in the long run is very beneficial for the US, and is something that I think we should definitely be incentivizing, keeping them here, to whatever degree that we can.

James Pittman: Now there are some built in worker protections in the CONRED 30 program. So how do those protections ensure fair treatment and job satisfaction, let's say, for international medical graduates when they're working in underserved areas.

Gil Guerra: Well, one of the concerns around this program is that you are essentially taking, again, someone who may have limited experience or exposure, with American culture and placing them in a state like, say, my state of Mississippi, that has a very low share, of foreign born, a very low share of the foreign born population. Oftentimes, again, these are rural, understaffed, underserved, communities that have been neglected for years. So the work hours, the work conditions, oftentimes in conjunction with that, can be quite difficult. That hasn't proven by any means to be a fatal problem for the program, but there are more protections that can be included. So organizations in this bill who are seeking to employ Conrad recipients have to disclose number of working hours, level of compensation, and other benefits that Colorado 30 Waiver recipients could receive during their time there. And recipients are also now able to switch locations if they are subject to workplace violations, and states that lose spots to those departures would also be able to replace them and recapture their lost waivers. So it essentially makes it so that in case a Conrad 30 doctor is subject to ethical treatments, they're free to actually leave without jeopardizing that status.

James Pittman: And what impact do you think the increase in the waiver slots per state is going to have on the overall effectiveness of the program?

Gil Guerra: Well, again, I think that being able to scale it, will be will be helpful for for many states. If you think about, again, the overall looming physician shortage, and especially, as I mentioned, the lack of specialists and the geriatric field. In particular, I think that oftentimes, states have to choose between, you know, physicians of one kind or another, specialists of one kind or another, and being able to plan in the long run, for having more spots, I think also diffuses, a lot of, state's tensions also.

James Pittman: Let's talk about the level of political support. So what is the level of political support for the reauthorization bill? How does it break down across party lines, and and how important would bipartisan support be for its success? And what do you think about what that says? Sorry. What do you think that says about the nature of the physician shortage issue?

Gil Guerra: Well, this is, at the moment, actually, a pretty remarkably bipartisan bill. Mhmm. The doctors act, which includes these components with it also is also, shares a lots of bipartisan support. And again, I think that that shows the pathway forward. I think previously, if you were, say, a moderate Republican trying to convince people that immigration was good, you typically spoke in the language of free markets, and you spoke, in the language of the freedom of movement of people and the ways in which, bringing immigrants here grew the economy, was good for businesses, and so on. And I think that arguments, really has been phased out, especially since the election of Donald Trump. I think the Republican party now again is, much more interested in ways in which immigration could be beneficial from a national security perspective, but also beneficial to their constituents who primarily live in rural areas. So the reauthorization has been supported by figures such as Rand Paul, other senators who are not necessarily always thought of as sort of moderates on immigration or deal makers even on immigration. I think that, again, the underlying importance of health, especially for older Americans is something that, thankfully is, something that has yet to be really tainted by the partisan politics quite as much, as, some other areas, unfortunately.

James Pittman: Well, now, do you think that the CONRAD 30 program could serve as a model for any other immigration related programs which are aimed at addressing labor shortages in critical sectors.

Gil Guerra: Sure. I mean, I think that it would be easy to see a way in which this waiver program in the future could be applied to other fields, where we really need very specific high skilled immigrants working in fields such as, for example, artificial intelligence. I'm really interested again in the ways in which to our previous points, being able to really target the benefits of immigration to a rural community, is something that I find has been kind of a fascinating turn recently. The Economic Innovation Group, has a proposal out called the Heartland Visa, which essentially places business, and startup owners in different mostly declining areas of the country. So that's something that I think could serve as, that aspect could also serve as a model in addition to the waiver aspects, of the program could serve as a a model for, immigration reforms going forward.

James Pittman: Now what would some of the long term potential benefits for rural communities be if CONRAD 30 if the CONRAD 30, physician access reauthorization act is successfully implemented?

Gil Guerra: Right. Well, I think the most obvious one is, obviously quality and length of life for people living in these communities. You know, if you have access to regular health care or even especially specialized health care, you don't have to travel, as far to get it. It's going to make it so that you only live longer, but you enjoy the quality of your life more. But beyond that, I think that, you know, doctors play a very important role in any community, being able to actually, you know, have someone in your community who is from a different country, but who's also providing a really critical service makes it so that I think it not only culturally benefits the the community itself, but I think one of the problems broadly experienced by things like immigration is that the benefits are oftentimes very diffuse. So you have increased levels of immigration, and, you know, you may see that there is less of a labor shortage in some fields, but you don't really personally feel it. But it's very easy to blame, immigration for things that's, you do concretely see, which is why it's easy to falsely oftentimes tie it to things like crime, etcetera. And I think programs like the Conrad 30 waiver are really important, really beneficial because they actually put the benefits of immigration, who again are not necessarily for the business class, but are for regular working Americans, especially Americans who may have been left behind by the modern economy really at the forefront really at the center of immigration policy. So in that sense, I think it's incredibly beneficial.

James Pittman: Let me give you one, very broad question just as we've opened it up, before we run out of time. And that's, Gil, what do you think the top three priorities for reforming the US immigration system should be at this time?

Gil Guerra: Well, I think, again, the first is having some sorts of reorientation of competition, with with China. And, you know, I I think that, you know, oftentimes you don't think of immigration as a tool in this competition, and that can take the place in the form, especially I think of technological development. You know, if you look at, say, the Manhattan Project, which obviously helped us win World War 2, the number of immigrants, scientists who are on that team or the children of immigrants who are on that team, was significantly high. So that's something that I think we need to continue being the premier destination for people who want to come here and who want to innovate so that we're able to essentially not let the future technology pull hands to an authoritarian power. And it's something that the US has taken very seriously in the past. Once it became clear that our main competitor after World War 2 was gonna be the Soviet Union. We established, for example, the Fulbright exchange program so that we could have young Americans go and teach in Europe, go and help, you know, essentially spread, like, American soft power, there shortly after the 9 11 terrorist attacks in 2001. By October of 2002, we had established the Kayyid Lugaar bill, which or the Kayyid Lugaar exchange program, which had Muslim students or students from Muslim majority countries come and study in the US while we sent to arts over there, which I think helped a lot of the Islamophobia and tensions there, with some of our regional partners, in the long run. Again, we don't currently have something like that targeted for Chinese influence. I think that we haven't fully snapped into, a approach that really looks at, immigration policy through that lens. So it's one of the areas we're working on. I mean, again, frankly, we do need low skilled immigration, as well. I think being able to have, temporary pathways, for, migrants who wanna work here, again, expanding the h two a visa, or improving the h two a visa is something that's very important. Then again, I think that's being able to reward our allies and being able to use immigration policy as something that we can use to demonstrate that if you work with us, we're willing to help you on. Again, that's that could be through expanding c one d use for Colombia. It could be through expanding, the use of the visa waiver program for our rural allies, of Uruguay, in the region, really making sure that, immigration, not only at the minds of the US public, but also, in the minds of the world is not something that always has a negative connotation attached to it and can actually be used that is used every day as a really powerful and positive cultural exchange. Being able to, really emphasize those three things. For me, it's, again, a critical.

James Pittman: Mhmm. Miguel, thanks so much for sharing your thoughts about that. We're at the end of the hour, but I I definitely do wanna have you back as we get closer to the election so that we can sort of talk about how proposals are shaping up in each party and and and where things are what it is looking like with the election and what's likely to happen in various scenarios. So I I hope you'll consider coming back to to talk about that as we get closer to November.

Gil Guerra: Absolutely. Happy to come back, and thank you for helping me, James.

James Pittman: Thank you very much, Gil.

‍