There's no contradiction if you don't assume that the skill level of the workforce is fixed. The first paper cited concludes that the government should invest heavily on better education & training and should ensure that there is a pathway to retraining with these new technologies. The second paper suggests that immigration is needed to bring more highly-skilled and highly-educated workers to the U.S. Both of them center around the need to increase the overall education & skill level of the U.S. workforce.

If you have no desire to learn new things, then yes, you will be in a world of hurt in the new economy. If you do, there are abundant opportunities for you.

> The second paper suggests that immigration is needed to bring more highly-skilled and highly-educated workers to the U.S.

That aspect is indeed covered, however you will notice is a small constituent of what was proposed. Much of the bill is focused on the increased labor participation for low-skilled work (also includes protection for the skilled US jobs, countering that original point) as well as the increased GDP expected due to more people to provide loans to etc. Also, put it in context of the distribution of skill level in the jobs filled by immigration.

Any of these papers can be quoted to support either side tbh, it can be quite hard to decipher and see the bigger picture.

This is not really a contradiction. Automation will indeed replace humans in millions of jobs, low-paying and otherwise, but until that process reaches a critical tipping point, we still have a country to run.