Missouri Senator Seeks OPT Overhaul, Calls It a Cheap Labor Pipeline

(MISSOURI) Missouri Senator Eric Schmitt is calling for the termination or sweeping overhaul of the federal Optional Practical Training (OPT) program, branding it a “cheap-labor pipeline” that he says harms young American workers and recent graduates.

In a letter dated November 15, 2025, addressed to Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, Senator Schmitt argued that the work program for foreign graduates has strayed far from its stated purpose and now serves, in his words, as “one of the most abused immigration programs” in the country.

What OPT is and how it works

The OPT program allows international students who have completed degrees at U.S. colleges and universities to work in the country. Key facts:

• Standard duration: Up to 12 months of work authorization after graduation.
• STEM extension: An additional 24-month extension is available for many science, technology, engineering, and math graduates.

Schmitt argues that what was presented as a short-term bridge between study and employment has become a long-term pathway for large employers to bring in foreign workers outside the standard visa system.

Senator Schmitt’s criticisms

Schmitt’s letter advances several linked arguments:

• He contends OPT acts as a “backdoor” into the U.S. job market, enabling firms to hire foreign graduates instead of American degree-holders.
• He says this structure suppresses wages, displaces domestic workers at the start of their careers, and signals to U.S. students that they are less attractive to major employers than foreign graduates eligible for OPT.
• He questions the program’s legal basis, noting that Congress has never passed a law directly authorizing OPT in its current form. Instead, he asserts, work permission has been expanded through regulation rather than legislation.
• Schmitt claims this regulatory route has placed powerful tools in the hands of large corporations while leaving American workers without clear representation in the process.

Allegations about universities and companies

In his letter to Secretary Noem, Senator Schmitt accuses both multinational companies and major universities of profiting from the OPT structure.

• He argues colleges have strong incentives to recruit more foreign students by promising post-graduation work access.
• He claims some campuses have become “visa mills” focused on fee‑paying international students and corporate demands rather than local communities and U.S. high‑school graduates.
• He accuses multinational companies of using OPT to access cheaper labor.

National security concerns

Schmitt also raises national security warnings:

• He asserts OPT can funnel foreign graduates into sensitive fields and advanced industries, potentially making it easier for strategic sectors of the U.S. economy to shift under foreign control.
• In this framing, OPT is not only a cheap-labor pipeline but also a doorway for long-term changes in who owns and directs key American industries.

“One of the most abused immigration programs,” Schmitt wrote, emphasizing both labor-market and strategic risks.

Political context and proposed changes

The November 15 letter aligns with reported plans inside the current administration to either substantially change or end OPT as part of an “America First” immigration agenda.

Schmitt urges the Department of Homeland Security and U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) to collaborate on reforms that would, in his view, restore entry‑level job opportunities to American citizens and legal permanent residents.

According to analysis by VisaVerge.com, the OPT debate has become a test case for broader fights over employment‑based immigration. Supporters of reform, like Schmitt, group OPT with visa categories such as H‑1B, arguing these programs share a structure where employers can tap cheaper foreign labor instead of investing in recruiting and training U.S. workers.

Arguments in defense of OPT

Critics of Schmitt’s position — including many universities and business groups — contend that OPT provides tangible benefits:

• Foreign graduates help fill open roles and bring fresh skills.
• They support research on campuses and in private industry.
• They pay taxes, spend money in local communities, and create international links that can boost trade and research partnerships.

These counterarguments are noted in the broader debate but are not reflected in Schmitt’s letter, which focuses sharply on perceived harms to American job-seekers.

Practical implications for workers and students

Schmitt’s claim that OPT creates a cheap-labor pipeline rests on the idea that foreign graduates may accept lower pay or tougher conditions because their ability to remain in the country can depend on their job.

• He argues this dynamic gives employers more power in salary negotiations and weakens the position of American applicants.
• He suggests that ending or sharply cutting OPT could, over time, push entry-level wages up in industries that currently rely on international graduates.

For individuals, the debate has personal consequences:

• For a U.S. student finishing an engineering degree, Schmitt’s plan might appear to promise less competition for first jobs.
• For an international student who enrolled partly because OPT was available, the same plan could mean losing the chance to gain U.S. work experience after paying years of higher tuition.

What happens next and where to find official info

As the administration weighs next steps, the future of OPT remains uncertain. Any decision to terminate or drastically reshape the program would likely be phased in to allow schools, employers, and students time to adjust.

For current and prospective students seeking official guidance on existing rules (eligibility, filing procedures, etc.), USCIS provides a resource on F‑1 students and employment at this page: uscis.gov.

Broader legislative implications

Schmitt’s push is part of a wider political movement targeting employment programs for foreign workers, including visas like H‑1B, which critics say replace American employees with lower‑paid overseas staff.

• Other lawmakers have already called for cuts or eliminations of such visas on similar grounds.
• Whether Congress joins Senator Schmitt in seeking an end to OPT will determine how far the cheap-labor pipeline debate reaches into future immigration law and labor-market policy.