Outsourcing of hi-tech jobs to India, China, Russia, the Philippines, and elsewhere has become an issue which is being debated in the Democratic primaries and in the US Congress, with current Democratic frontrunner in the presidential race, Senator John Kerry, calling companies which outsource 'Benedict Arnolds.'

The name refers to an American 'traitor' who defected from the ranks of American revolutionaires to join the British colonists.

• India and Outsourcing: Complete Coverage

Kerry was quoted by Contra Costa Times on the West Coast as denouncing the Bush Administration for 'rewarding Benedict Arnold CEOs who move profits and jobs overseas.'

Kerry had also introduced a bill in November that would require call centre operators to disclose their physical locations to consumers with the aim of discouraging the practice.

Howard Dean, the former Vermont Governor who is fighting to continue in the Presidential race has told audiences that America needs a President 'who doesn't think that big corporations who get tax cuts ought to be able to move their headquarters to Bermuda.'

Income can be transferred by American corporations to Bermuda without being subjected to higher American taxes.

The Contra Costa Times, which credited Bush for an economic recovery, however, questioned job growth, claiming only 1,000 jobs were created in December, a fraction of the 300,000 new jobs projected by the Bush Administration.

"As the temperature rises over disappointing job growth, the controversial practice of 'offshoring' has worked its way into the rhetoric of the presidential campaign trail," it wrote.

Kerry's criticism has to be taken seriously, analysts note, because he is not only a frontrunner currently in the Democratic Party but as polls also say he may beat Bush to the White House.

However, statistics on outsourcing are fuzzy, with different reports disagreeing over the exact number of jobs lost. A University of California-Berkeley report estimates 14 million US jobs at risk.

Congress has also got into the act. At a hearing this week, both Republican and Democratic Congressmen denounced offshoring while a rider attached to the 2004 budget bars US Government contracts from being awarded to companies which outsource their work.

"I think the issue is going to be exaggerated and manipulated by both sides in the political debate," said Dean Davison, an analyst at the Meta Group, a technology research and advisory firm in Stanford Connecticut.

The Federal contract provision, added to the budget by Senator Craig Thomas, a Republican from Wyoming, raised a storm in New Delhi.

John Palatiello, a Washington-based lobbyist representing domestic companies bidding for privatisation contracts, said the Congressional ban would only affect certain services such as architectural design work, as the rest of the work is being done in the US.

He said the aim of the amendment, which expires on September 30 -- the end of the financial year, was to prevent federal unions from claiming their jobs were being sent overseas.

India-born Rafiq Dossani, a consulting professor at Stanford University's Asia/Pacific Research Centre, a proponent of the efficacy of outsourcing, however, was concerned about its political consequences.

"This," he said, "may be a problem in the minds of some politicians now, even before there has been sufficient analysis of what is going on. But I think over the next five years this is going to have a huge impact. The range of jobs that can be offshored is mind-boggling."

Some US departments are reversing outsourcing. The Department of Labour has given a $3 million grant to Solano County on the West Coast to bring trainers from offshore to teach locals jobs which would normally have gone offshore.

The Bay Area Council has teamed up with the Bay Area Technology Education Collaborative (Bay TEC) to bring 759 workers with advanced-level skills to train information technology to local people.