P.S. A cynical person might believe that the "real" concern here is the protection of corporate interests and not public interests.
Well, Capitalism isn't so-named because we like to start sentences with capitals. The government is involved in protecting both. Sometimes they conflict, but usually (it seems) they are dealt with on a case by case basis.
This from a branch of a Government that does little if anything to "curtail/control/restrict/etc the outflow of income/jobs/taxes/etc to foreign (cheap labor) shores of domestic corporations intent on enhancing corporate and personal executive remuneration with little or no regard to the social consequences at home.
Considering that a number of businesses that went with the "no mexicans have worked on this product" approach and failed because the labour costs in most developed countries, the "rules" they have to follow as a result of unions, and any number of things, I think they are sort of learning from experience. Also, consider that those costs will be given back to the consumer; if you really wanted something entirely made over here we'd be looking at paying a good several thousand dollars again for a entry-level PC. Let's not forget that a number of companies don't simply use those other countries (such as taiwan) for manufacturing; some of them actually have a market there as well; so in that case we'd be paying several thousand dollars for a PC because the company insisted on only getting labor from the target market; meanwhile, people in Taiwan would be paying the equivalent of a few hundred because their labor force is cheaper. In fact, without outsourcing of the labour costs early PCs might have been entirely unaffordable, and the entire industry might have never gotten off the ground here; Of course that wouldn't have stopped any other countries from getting in the game, but it's important to notice that the cost-savings are not only enjoyed by the company and are in fact required so the the product has a price competitive with other products as well as something people would be willing to pay for.
This doesn't even touch on the fact that the ICE (and CBSA in Canada, I believe) doesn't really have any power to stop it anyway. What legal precedent or law could they invoke. "hey lexmark/IBM/etc, you're not allowed to build anything in Asia" Would sort of need a law to back it up.
of course, any such law could not be made specific to the Computer industry; after all, various other materials and goods are manufactured in other countries. And would companies in Canada be allowed to "outsource" to American companies anymore? After all, the U.S a foreign country, so really following the same line of reasoning we shouldn't be letting American companies establish "forward bases" in Canada since all the production is still done in the states, and vice versa for the U.S and the snow and maple syrup imports they receive from Canada.
Basically, the idea you are promoting here is one of agoraphobia. Which can never work in today's markets; ask Russia.
On the original topic...