Is Sen. Charles ‘Chuck’ Schumer’s ‘chop shop’ slur on Infosys Technologies a mere electoral gimmick? Or, does it signal the start of a fresh bout against outsourcing?

Before evaluating that question, consider President Barack Obama’s comments, days after Schumer’s remark. The days of outsourcing are numbered, he implied when asserting that his policies had restored America’s competitiveness “over the long run so the jobs and industries of the future weren't going to China or India or Germany, but were going to the United States of America, right here."

As the remarks of Obama and New York Democrat Schumer’s remark echoed, I had two interesting ‘encounters’ with outsourcing, both of which cast doubt on Obama’s ‘belief,’ or should we call it mere rhetoric.

First, a U.S.-based Indian who runs a small outsourcing company in Chennai told me he had no difficulty adding new clients or increasing the scope of outsourcing with existing clients. What kept him awake at night was his ability to expand the scale of operations in this country and, to a smaller extent, the rising local costs. His company has grown at an annual rate of over 20 percent, even during the past two years when the U.S. economy tanked.

My second ‘encounter’ was with an American editor determined to offshore writing of news. I tried to dissuade him, saying English-language reporting and writing skills that meet American standards are not plentiful in India, unlike back-office and call-center workers. Besides, domain knowledge would pose a further challenge. Even if you could hire such talent, I concluded, it is likely to be costly and accrued savings might not be worthwhile, especially if you consider the fact that hundreds, if not thousands, of high-quality U.S. journalists are out of jobs and can be hired at reasonable cost.

Grudgingly, he seemed to agree with my view but would not be dissuaded from his goal of outsourcing. ‘If it’s not India, it will be some other country,’ he told me. I interpreted his determination as a strong belief that U.S. publishers, already reeling from a plunge in circulation and huge slowdown in advertising, are beginning to see low-cost offshoring as the only viable way to run profitably. The unequivocal message: There’s no stopping outsourcing. If publishers can outsource high-quality English-language writing to countries such as India, I can’t imagine many other services that cannot be sent overseas.

To be fair to Obama, there is precious little that even the president of the world’s most powerful country can do to reverse this trend. He just doesn’t have any powers to crack the whip in the free market economy. Over the past decade, outsourcing has become mainstream and, in most situations, it is considered a no-brainer. Even smaller companies have entered the fray and are discovering significant cost benefits and large companies surely can no longer exist without offshoring. The biggest beneficiaries of this have been American companies and shareholders, a point that is often overlooked by critics of outsourcing.

In the circumstances, to imagine, as Obama appears to, that he has made his country competitive over the long run is wishful, or simply a cheap political lie to comfort the poor and the jobless. It also smacks of shortsightedness, something even his critics don’t accuse him of. If America’s long-term competitiveness is to be restored, it is going to be a slow process requiring a number of things starting probably with the revamp of its educational system.

What Obama has done so far is little. He amended tax rates applicable to U.S. companies that offshore work, making it less profitable for them to ship jobs overseas. But that is expected to have a limited impact, considering the size of the benefits that accrue to American companies from outsourcing. Now, the visa fees for H-1B visas, which enable foreign workers to work in the U.S., is being increased by a steep $2,000. As must seem obvious, this widely criticized move does nothing to jobs that are being shipped completely to foreign shores. It only affects the cost to outsourcing providers like Infosys of operating in the U.S. and, in fact, adds a stronger incentive to take jobs out.

In years past, when reliable outsourcing technologies had not fully evolved, and notions about India were very different, H-1B visas were vital to any Indian company seeking outsourcing business. No longer. Indian companies already employ between 85 percent and 95 percent of their workforce in India. Over time, these companies will find a way to further minimize staff in the U.S. Also, as Infosys has already said, firms will pass on the additional cost to its customers. The higher visa fees surely will bring more to Uncle Sam’s coffers but it is unlikely to curb outsourcing. If anything, Obama’s battle against outsourcing so far has betrayed a lack of ideas that makes me ask: What next, Mr. President?