The Optional Practical Training (OPT) program has played a critical role in allowing foreign students, particularly those from India, to stay in the United States after graduation and gain valuable work experience. However, calls to eliminate the OPT program are growing, especially from MAGA nativists, who argue that it serves as a backdoor to H-1B visas, thereby displacing American workers. Here, we delve into how ending OPT could affect U.S. universities, international students, and the broader U.S. economy.
OPT Program: A Key Pathway for International Students
The OPT program was established as a way for foreign students to gain practical work experience in the U.S. after completing their academic programs. For students holding F-1 visas, participation in OPT begins after the completion of their first academic year. For those who graduate in STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics) fields, the OPT period can extend to as much as three years.
As reported by TNN, “MAGA hardliners are now arguing that OPT is H-1B without Congressional approval and it needs to be canned because it is ‘killing jobs for new American college grads.'” The OPT program was initially intended to be a temporary work opportunity, but it has become a key part of many international students’ pathways to long-term work visas and, in some cases, U.S. citizenship.
Impact on International Students
For foreign students, particularly from countries like India, the OPT program is often a crucial stepping stone. After completing their academic degrees, students can apply for work authorization through OPT, which allows them to remain in the U.S. for up to three years. During this period, many students transition into H-1B visas, which can provide extended work opportunities. Over time, some may even secure green cards and, eventually, U.S. citizenship.
According to the Congressional Research Service (CRS) report, in 2023, there were 1.49 million F-1 and M-1 students and recent graduates in the U.S. Of these, 344,686 students were authorized to work via OPT, representing about 23% of all international students. The statistics are a testament to the program’s significance, as many foreign students rely on OPT to gain relevant work experience in the U.S. post-graduation.
If the OPT program were to end, these students would face a difficult choice: Leave the U.S. immediately after graduation or find another way to remain in the country. Without access to OPT, foreign students may be less likely to pursue higher education in the U.S. in the first place.
Financial and Academic Consequences on Universities
U.S. universities have increasingly come to rely on international students, not only for academic diversity but also for financial reasons. International students pay significantly higher tuition fees than domestic students, contributing substantially to the revenue of many universities.
According to a 2021 Department of Commerce’s Office of Travel and Tourism Industries (OTTI) report, international students contributed $39 billion to the U.S. economy, with a large portion of that coming from tuition fees. The OPT program extends students’ time in the U.S., allowing universities to benefit from their presence for a longer period. If OPT were eliminated, universities would lose a major draw for international students, especially in fields like STEM, where the OPT extension is particularly valuable.
Beyond finances, international students bring diversity to academic institutions, enriching classrooms with perspectives from across the globe. Their involvement in research and academic projects strengthens the overall educational experience. Eliminating the OPT program could result in fewer international students pursuing degrees in the U.S., thereby decreasing the cultural and academic exchange that is so highly valued in many universities.
MAGA Hardliners’ Argument: A “Guest Worker” Program?
MAGA nativists argue that the OPT program, which has expanded over the years, is a de facto guest worker program that allows foreign nationals to take jobs that could otherwise go to U.S. graduates. “It was never meant as a permanent immigration pathway, but rather a short-term opportunity for skill development…Employers saw OPT workers as desperate, willing to do anything for H-1B sponsorship before their permit expired,” said the US tech workers coalition, in an interaction with TNN.
They believe that OPT has become a loophole, allowing students to stay in the U.S. longer than intended and take jobs that could be filled by American workers. This, they argue, is harmful to the job market, especially for recent U.S. graduates.
How the OPT Program Has Evolved
The OPT program was introduced in 1947, with regulations that allowed foreign students to work in the U.S. if employment was required or recommended by their school. Initially, the program was designed for short-term, practical training. However, over the years, the program has expanded, with key changes made under both Republican and Democratic administrations.
2008: The Bush Administration extended OPT for STEM graduates from 12 months to 29 months.
2016: The Obama Administration further extended OPT for STEM graduates, allowing them to stay for up to 36 months.
These extensions were justified based on the economic and technological contributions that foreign students bring to the U.S., as well as the need to maintain national security by keeping highly skilled workers in the country.
Could Eliminating OPT Harm the U.S. Economy?
Ending the OPT program would have far-reaching consequences not just for universities and international students, but also for the U.S. economy. Many foreign graduates contribute to key sectors like technology, healthcare, and engineering. If these students were forced to leave after graduation, the U.S. would lose out on a significant pool of talent.
In fact, “OPT allows foreign nationals to contribute to the American economy and makes the U.S. a more attractive destination for foreign students,” TNN reported.
The Road Ahead: A Critical Decision
The future of the OPT program remains uncertain. If it is abolished, the U.S. risks losing a valuable component of its international student ecosystem. Universities would face both financial and academic losses, while foreign students would lose an essential path to gaining work experience in the country.
As the debate continues, it is clear that the outcome of this discussion will significantly impact not only the landscape of U.S. higher education but also the broader economy and workforce.
