The controversial Arizona immigration legislation has resurrected the immigration debate.

This debate has prompted intense emotions, boycotts and inter-city disputes, all demonstrating that complex problems cannot be addressed with simple short-term solutions -- we need to reform our fractured system. This reform must be forward-looking and strategically geared toward strengthening our economic standing and competitiveness in the global market.

Although the undocumented occupy the forefront of the debate, concern about greater enforcement has permeated the business immigration realm. Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, has recently called for greater scrutiny and stricter regulation of the L visa process. Together with Senate Majority Leader Richard J. Durbin, D-Ill., he has introduced legislation that would impose new restrictions on companies hiring foreign workers in H-1B and L visa categories and increase fraud-prevention and enforcement initiatives for these visas. (Durbin and Grassley introduced a similar bill during the prior session of Congress, which failed to pass.) Grassley has also publicly called on Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano to further investigate the L visa program.

The L visa is a highly favorable vehicle used by multinational companies to transfer executive, managerial and specialized knowledge personnel to a company's U.S. office. As a threshold requirement, the L visa category requires at least 50 percent common ownership or control between the foreign entity and the U.S. employer by way of a parent, subsidiary, affiliate or branch relationship. It is one of many categories of nonimmigrant visas, which authorize foreign nationals to enter and remain in the United States on a temporary basis, but do not directly lead to permanent residence (i.e., a green card).

Our immigration policy must be examined in the context of the international business climate, and the L is an essential component of a successful business immigration strategy. Because of the flexibility it provides companies to capitalize on a global pool of human resources, the L has become an indispensable tool for multinational corporations operating in the U.S.

Nonetheless, overall use of this visa is quite limited, and does not diminish employment opportunities for Americans in any significant way. The State Department issued a total of 124,275 L visas in 2009, a mere 2 percent of the total 5,804,182 nonimmigrant visas issued last year.

Moreover, the L visa facilitates foreign investment in the U.S., which in turn creates American jobs. According to the Department of Commerce, 5.5 million workers were employed in the U.S. by majority-owned U.S. affiliates of foreign multinational corporations in 2008.

Yet at an economically precarious time when we should be incentivizing productivity and foreign investment, we are erecting barriers that stand to discourage investment and dampen economic growth and recovery. The government recently became significantly more stringent in processing L visas, approving fewer petitions and subjecting U.S. employers to an increasingly onerous application process. And it is at this very time that legislators such as Grassley are championing even more rigorous oversight and regulation of the L visa.

The general consensus in the business community is that overly burdensome regulation impedes economic performance and growth, and this principle applies with equal force to business immigration.

While visa applicants must indeed be thoroughly screened for security purposes and to prevent fraud, current heavy-handed bureaucratic processing and purely enforcement-minded proposals will not strengthen American security or competitiveness.

Therefore, when we erect an invisible fence to address security and fraud issues, let us make sure it includes a gateway to foreign investment.