Guest Post by Joe Guzzardi
Nearly 1.6 million international university students were enrolled in the U.S., according to the most recent data from Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Of the 1.6 million, 328,205 participated in Optional Practical Training (OPT), which allows foreign-born students to work in U.S. jobs, ostensibly to obtain hands-on work experience in their chosen fields.
To its critics, however, the OPT program represents a bridge to the H-1B visa and, eventually, to a green card and U.S. citizenship. Along the way, OPTs permanently displace American tech workers. And American college students from employment.
The big winners in international enrollments are the universities that collect full freight, out-of-state tuition. As The Wall Street Journal explained in a 2018 story, “Program Allowing Foreign Students to Work Has Grown Rapidly,” U.S. colleges “have used the prospect of at least short-term postgraduate employment as a way to appeal to foreign students…doing away with the program would certainly be a big hit to schools.”
Other winners include the students themselves who hope to parlay their advanced degrees into high-paying U.S. jobs in tech or other industries. Tech employers who use OPT to circumnavigate the 85,000 annual H-1B cap, and thus keep their cheap labor pool stocked, also are winners. A report from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Employment Statistics found that all of the (STEM) science, tech, engineering and math employment growth went to overseas workers.
Big losers include college hopefuls found among the 4 million U.S. high school students who graduate each year. Incoming freshman slots are a fixed number; every international student that fills a 
university seat lowers the admission odds for U.S. high school diploma-holders and reduces the number of U.S. children receiving scholarships for STEM study. Also coming out on the short end are American tech workers whose jobs are given to OPTs.
Other occupations are vulnerable too. Along with the B tourist visa, the F and M visas often spawn illegal immigration. Tourists and students enter legally, but when their visas expire, many overstay, provide employers with falsified personal information on their I-9 forms, and are hired. Overstaying rarely has consequences since the Department of Homeland Security openly admitted to Congress that it doesn’t look for, let alone track, those who stay beyond their visas’ expiration date.
The State Department’s F and M student visas enable soaring international admissions. Since these visas have no numerical limit, more overseas students will continue to arrive into the foreseeable future. The total has grown quantum leaps and bounds to today’s 1.6 million. Nearly half the student population today comes from China and India; other sending nations predominantly include South Korea, Saudi Arabia and Japan.
Here’s a prime illustration of the foreign student influx, looking at just one school. In her book, “Billions Lost: The American Tech Crisis and the Road Map to Change,” Hilarie T. Gamm wrote that in the 2016-2017 academic year, of MIT’s 2,876 graduate students, 51 percent were from Asia, primarily China and India. During the same period, MIT, known for its STEM graduate programs, had less than 10 percent American STEM students enrolled in tech PhD programs.
“More” always drives the immigration debate. The U.S., or so the routinely debunked pro-immigration arguments go, always needs more. America needs more legal immigration, we’re told, because the nation is growing older; universities need more diverse students, and the tech industry needs more employment-based visas.
But everything – except, that is, for bad immigration laws that hurt American citizens – has limits. Worth noting is that the first of what would morph into three OPT work permission extensions, from 12 to 29 to 36 months, was negotiated during cocktail party chit chat between DHS Secretary Michael Chertoff and Microsoft cofounder Bill Gates. Americans could not have been more completely shut out of the good old boys’ process.
Congress should impose a cap on foreign students that’s consistent with maintaining a reasonable international presence in American higher education, but that doesn’t shut out qualified U.S. workers and deserving high school graduates.
It is my sincere desire to provide readers of this site with the best unbiased information available, and a forum where it can be discussed openly, as our Founders intended. But it is not easy nor inexpensive to do so, especially when those who wish to prevent us from making the truth known, attack us without mercy on all fronts on a daily basis. So each time you visit the site, I would ask that you consider the value that you receive and have received from The Burning Platform and the community of which you are a vital part. I can't do it all alone, and I need your help and support to keep it alive. Please consider contributing an amount commensurate to the value that you receive from this site and community, or even by becoming a sustaining supporter through periodic contributions. [Burning Platform LLC - PO Box 1520 Kulpsville, PA 19443] or Paypal
-----------------------------------------------------
To donate via Stripe, click here.
-----------------------------------------------------
Use promo code ILMF2, and save up to 66% on all MyPillow purchases. (The Burning Platform benefits when you use this promo code.)
Who pays the tuition? If not the student or their country of origin, the U.S. taxpayers, and or our grandchildren’s national debt they will inherit?
A Saudi “businessman” paid for barry hussein’s graduate education.
(Written from the perspective of a Canadian who went to grad school at Berkeley–a wonderful university–then left once I graduated, like a good little guest.) I understand Americans feel inundated with immigrants and it can seem overwhelming and unfair to Americans. I completely agree with the need for border controls and realistic numbers of H1-B visas so American STEM grads are not penalized. But this article misses a very important plus for the USA. Many of those STEM students from overseas stay to work in the US, which is critical if the country hopes to maintain its lead in technology. Where it costs an American STEM grad a job, the job should obviously go to the American, but where an American of similar talent is not available, the benefit to the country should be clear. This is actually a negative for the countries providing the students (especially India and China) who lose some top talent to US firms. The brain-drain is something Americans seldom hear about because the US is the beneficiary. This article portrays this as a negative for the US, which is utter nonsense. Believe it or not, immigration can actually benefit a nation, which has been the case for the United States for most of its history. So stop moaning all the time about it for God’s sake.
I for one am generally happy to accept STEM graduates in, so long as the degree is real, asopposed to watermelon pickers. It is no contest.
Immigration is only a value to the host country if the immigrant assimilates. Often, they come in ignorant, learn Marxism and feminism and victimism along with their major, and wind up (1) taking a job from a citizen, (2) agitating for socialism and (3) voting for socialism. Can you truly argue that such a person is an asset to the host country? Or are they both a net and strategic loss?