Rep. Paul Gosar, DDS, a Republican congressman from Arizona, has long been an outspoken advocate for America First policies. Known for challenging controversial immigration programmes, he has now turned his attention to the Optional Practical Training (OPT) program. In a recent letter to the White House, Gosar called OPT “unauthorized, abused, and costly to the American taxpayer,” arguing that it prioritizes foreign workers over American graduates. He co-sponsors H.R. 2315, the Fairness for High-Skilled Americans Act, which seeks to terminate OPT and prevent any similar program unless explicitly authorized by Congress.Gosar says it clearly that OPT is a loophole that is undermining the American workforce. It was created in 1992 and later expanded by the Obama administration. The programme provides room for international students on F-1 visas to remain in the US for up to three years after completing just one year of education.Supporters argue it fills gaps in the STEM workforce and provides students with experience. Critics, including Gosar, say it fills a gap the program itself creates, allowing foreign workers to take jobs that could go to domestic graduates. The question is stark: Is America sidelining its own talent in favour of cheaper foreign labour?
H.R. 2315: A clean termination or partial reform?
H.R. 2315 carries an aim to “cleanly” wipe off OPT and block any similar program without explicit congressional authorization. Gosar forewarns that partial reforms could inadvertently strengthen OPT, much like DACA. While supporters of OPT argue it bestows valuable experience and helps US companies compete globally, critics ask, is this worth sidelining domestic talent? Should American students wait in line while foreign graduates fill positions at lower costs? The debate highlights a fundamental tension in U.S. immigration policy: who should truly come first, American graduates or foreign workers?
What does the OPT participation trends say?
The US Congress and the Library of Congress official data indicates that participation in the OPT program has more than doubled since 2007, the earliest year for which the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) provides comparable data. The introduction of the STEM OPT extension in 2008 and its expansion in 2016 allowed international students to stay and work in the U.S. for longer periods after graduation. In 2007, 154,522 nonimmigrant students were authorized for OPT. Numbers grew steadily each year from 2011 to 2019, dropped during the COVID-19 pandemic, and then rose to 418,781 in 2024.More than two-thirds of students authorized for OPT come from Asian countries. Between 2020 and 2024, the top countries of origin for OPT participants were India, China, South Korea, Taiwan, Nepal, Canada, Nigeria, Vietnam, Brazil, and Mexico. India and China alone made up 35% and 24% of the total, while South Korea accounted for just 3%.OPT participants are largely concentrated in STEM fields. In 2024, 31% of OPT students majored in computer science and 18% in engineering. Business majors made up 15%, followed by mathematics/statistics, biological and biomedical sciences, social sciences, visual and performing arts, health professions, physical sciences, and communication. Many OPT workers are employed by large technology firms like Amazon, Google, Microsoft, and Meta, as well as major university systems such as the University of California and Arizona State University.
Does OPT impact American students?
The Optional Practical Training (OPT) programme allows international students, including a large number from India, to work in the US after completing their studies. It is primarily used in STEM fields, where skill shortages have long been acknowledged. While some critics argue that OPT increases competition for entry-level roles, the extent to which it directly disadvantages American graduates remains debated.In many sectors, OPT participants are not replacing domestic talent but complementing it. Employers often turn to international graduates for specialised technical skills or research experience that is not easily available in sufficient numbers locally. Indian students, in particular, are concentrated in high-skill domains such as computer science, engineering, and data analytics, where demand continues to outpace supply.It is also important to note that OPT is time-bound. Participants cannot remain in the US indefinitely under the programme, and many eventually transition out of the workforce or return to their home countries. This limits its long-term impact on the American job market.It is an undeniable fact that OPT breathes fresh air into innovation and research output. American technology firms, universities, and research institutions rely on this talent to maintain momentum in some sectors. Rather than shrinking opportunities, these contributions often support growth that can generate more jobs overall.The real policy challenge, therefore, is not about American students vs. international students. It is about bestowing fairness, transparency, and adequate opportunities for both. As discussions are circulating in Washington, the focus remains on whether adjustments, not outright elimination. It has to make a balance between domestic workforce needs while enshrining the benefits of global talent mobility.
