''Benedict Arnold CEOs.''

I was stunned to hear a respected U.S. senator and a candidate for president make such a statement. Lest I am accused of election year partisanship, a U.S. senator of the same party deserves kudos for stating, ''You cannot say you love jobs and hate employers.''

Yet such statements like the first underscore the overheated rhetoric over global competition and the issue of offshoring.

Vigorous debate is healthy, but we offer more heat than light if we don't base the discussion on facts. It is important that we grapple with the underlying issue: regaining our competitive edge.

As offshoring is debated, let's keep three key points in mind: worldwide markets, global competitiveness and ''onshoring.''

Silicon Valley employers are located around the world because customers are located around the world -- often accounting for 60 to 70 percent of a U.S. company's customer base. Facilities and employees located abroad are vital to meeting the needs of global customers for logistics, supply chains, material resources, local customs and a local talent pool.

As the standard of living continues to improve for people around the globe, demand for our products will grow.

U.S. companies, workers, and policy makers must recognize that we are in an intense global competition:

In the next 15 years, China is building more roads to move people and product than the United States has built in the past 65 years.

Our students consistently rank 19th or 20th out of the 20 top industrialized nations in math and science. In Silicon Valley, only 58 percent of our students read at grade level. Let that sink in -- more than four out of 10 Silicon Valley kids can't even read proficiently; and if they can't read, they can't do math, they can't do science and they certainly cannot compete for high-skill, high-wage jobs.

300,000 engineers graduated from universities in China in 2002, and India produces close to one million engineers and programmers every year. In the United States, 60,000 students graduated with engineering degrees in 2002.

Preventing offshoring is not only unrealistic, but also unwise. Such actions would lead to similar reactions from abroad, and American workers and our economy would suffer. The reason is simple. Nearly 6.5 million Americans work in the United States for foreign companies with operations here. According to the Department of Commerce, foreign employers added 3.4 million U.S. workers to their payrolls between 1986 and 2001, almost equaling the 3.5 million jobs that U.S. companies offered overseas.

While job numbers for the past year are not yet available, foreign firms invested $82 billion in the United States in 2003 alone -- more than double the previous year, which indicates that foreign firms added about 400,000 jobs in the United States last year.

Many headlines about offshoring focus on ''white-collar service jobs'' being sent abroad. Yet Department of Commerce data shows that even more of that service work flows to the United States.

We should all worry about the flood of bills at the national level and in 30 state legislatures -- including at least 12 bills in California -- seeking to limit offshoring. Instead, policy makers, working with job providers and workers, should adopt policies that increase U.S. competitiveness in a global marketplace.

In that spirit, to keep the idea and innovation factory known as Silicon Valley successful, policy choices should revolve around four factors:

Education -- We need to commit the resources and resolve to build the best K-12 and higher education system in the world. We must also invest in retraining our workforce, both today's employees and for those who have lost their jobs, by expanding the Trade Adjustment Act to assist service workers.

Infrastructure -- In the 1960s, California invested 16 percent of its general fund in infrastructure. Today, we invest 2 percent. The fifth-largest economy in the world cannot compete with a Third World investment in infrastructure.

Research and development -- If the seeds of innovation are planted here, the trees will more likely grow here. We must reward R&D at U.S. universities and private companies.

''Do no harm'' -- Public policy decisions must foster a climate that attracts, or at least retains, jobs. Local, state and federal policy makers must at least ask the question, ''Will this help our economy, improve our ability to create and keep jobs, and put Californians back to work?''

We must sound the alarm without sounding like alarmists. Protectionism, and barriers to foreign borders, is not a solution; it is a reaction. American employers, led by Silicon Valley, must engage in this debate by reaching out to elected officials with ideas that will instill trust and inspire inno- vation.

CARL GUARDINO is president and CEO of the Silicon Valley Manufacturing Group. He wrote this column for the Mercury News.

© 2004 San Jose Mercury News