Politicians Need To Get Serious About Retaining Foreign Graduates
Donald Trump had a point before his campaign walked it back.

During a podcast appearance last week, former President Donald Trump made an uncharacteristic argument. "What I will do, is you graduate from a college, I think you should get automatically, as part of your diploma, a green card to be able to stay in this country," he said, adding that he would even include graduates of junior colleges.
A Trump campaign spokesperson quickly tempered that proposal, promising an "aggressive vetting process" that would "exclude all communists, radical Islamists, Hamas supporters, America haters and public charges." The green card offer would only apply to college graduates "who would never undercut American wages or workers," the spokesperson continued. (It's important to couch Trump's initial statement even further: As The Washington Post's Catherine Rampell has pointed out, the Trump administration "implemented policies that further restricted skilled legal immigration and made the lives of these international workers and students a living hell.")
But the back-and-forth—and the pushback Trump's remarks received—shouldn't deter politicians from treating foreign graduate retention as a weakness that the U.S. needs to address.
"The U.S. spends resources training hundreds of thousands of international students every year, but only provides opportunities for a fraction of them to stay after graduation," says Connor O'Brien, a research and policy analyst at the Economic Innovation Group (EIG), a bipartisan public policy organization. "This is an incredible gift to China and other competitors, who have their best and brightest educated in America and then forced back home by our backward immigration system."
An EIG analysis released yesterday found that only four in 10 international graduates of U.S. universities end up staying in the country long-term, according to data from the National Survey of College Graduates. Three-quarters of Ph.D. recipients stay, while half of master's degree recipients and just 17 percent of bachelor's degree recipients do. Some may be leaving simply because their best employment prospects are in their home countries or elsewhere. Still, a key factor is that "a growing population of international students is competing for a fixed number of opportunities to stay," the EIG analysis notes.
"Unless we expand skilled visa programs like the H-1B, or add more employment-based green cards, we will continue losing tens of thousands of talented graduates each year," O'Brien argues. "There are some real downsides to guaranteeing green cards for new graduates"—it may create bad incentives for universities, for one—"but it is clear we need to get better at retention, and that requires more visas."
A hostile immigration system means many international students never make it to the U.S. in the first place. An April report from the National Foundation for American Policy, a nonpartisan public policy organization, argued that international students increasingly see Canada as a more favorable destination. Between 2000 and 2021, international student enrollment in Canada increased by 544 percent, compared to a 45 percent increase in the United States.
Discussions about high-skilled immigration are often sidetracked in favor of unproductive arguments about the southern border—look no further than last night's presidential debate for proof. That's a shame. Border policy desperately needs reform and has deep humanitarian and economic implications, but attracting and retaining high-skilled foreign talent are pressing issues too.
Just a few presidential elections ago, the two major-party candidates were happy to embrace this vision. "I'd staple a green card to the diploma of someone who gets an advanced degree in America," Sen. Mitt Romney (R–Utah) said in 2012. President Barack Obama likewise said he supported "encouraging foreign students to stay in the U.S. and contribute to our economy by stapling a green card to the diplomas" of advanced STEM degree graduates.
This policy is no panacea, of course. Other reforms to the high-skilled immigration system remain necessary, such as addressing the massive green card backlogs that force scores of visa holders to wait decades for permanent status. Congressional inaction is a persistent roadblock to pretty much any meaningful immigration reform.
The U.S. has the enviable honor of being the top destination for international students. It's time for politicians to get serious about retaining them through smart policy.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
https://x.com/Babygravy9/status/1806696753963348302?t=gblsSTEdceQs_AaPvbG9-A&s=19
Hatred of whites has been normalised to such an extent across the West that any gathering of white people, in any context, can be called into question and condemned simply on that basis: that white people are gathering together.
[Link]
Skin color is the most important thing.
It is for the government.
https://x.com/cremieuxrecueil/status/1806800062149701678?t=qj1LXlG9R3hDrNyDsVbGvw&s=19
Proponents of environmental theories of group differences regularly treat open sharing of code and data like their biggest fear
A session at the Behavior Genetics Assn. meeting today included the argument that hereditarians have weaponized transparency (i.e., doing good science)
It has always been true that hereditarians have been more into doing science correctly, because they are generally the sorts of people who want to know if they're right, so they demand tests.
Their opponents, on the other hand, promote ignorance, make incoherent arguments, and mislead, with intent. People like Kamin and Lewontin used to be open about misleading others. People like Turkheimer now simply act like scientific discovery is impossible, without real reason.
Science is, to them, political, so why not?
Because we want to know things, of course. Because knowledge is always better than ignorance, of course. Because the knowledge we can gain is important, of course.
Hereditarians are always stuck in the position of writing the proposals and offering the assurances and doing the work to move things forward, and the environmentalists always want to set up barriers
Consider @charlesmurray's attempt to make a sort of 'bipartisan' discovery team
In 2005, Murray posted on the "Evolutionary Psychology" Yahoo discussion group that he emailed scholars on both sides of the "race/IQ" debate.
He wanted everyone to agree to a definitive test.
The hereditarians all agreed.
The environmentalists said no, and wouldn't agree.
In more recent years, the enemies of honesty, open science, etc., have not just refused to get on board with an effort from both sides to solve issues, they've barred anyone looking.
In 2022, James Lee wrote about this in @CityJournal:
The whole thing is embarrassing.
Hereditarians repeatedly call for more openness, more data, more tests, and more collaboration across the aisle, and their opponents refuse to stop being opponents; they refuse to make the work they critique better, more credible, more acceptable
And so here we are:
Hereditarians are likely correct about genetic contributions to group differences, but they're reviled.
The evidence has gotten stronger, and their support has grown weaker
Now professional associations even support calls to make science a closed enterprise
We're all worse off for it now, and we'll continue to be worse off for it into the foreseeable future.
[Links]
https://x.com/cremieuxrecueil/status/1806830876480995348?t=q85FPHemB4uxtuj75xc8Tg&s=19
Socioeconomic status does not cause variation in African ancestry among African Americans, but it is reliably related to it.
This applies to all of the three main dimensions: occupation, income, and education.
[Graphic, link]
Old man yells at clouds.
IMMIGRANTS ARE ICKY!
Poor , pour sarc.
Filling jobs Americans don't want. And also the high end jobs Americans are too busy posting Tik-Tok videos to try to qualify for.
Do you still not know the difference between low skilled illegal immigrants and high skilled legal immigrants?
People might change their minds if immigrants own nation wasn’t so ‘icky’.
Faith in not being 'icky' has to be earned.
At 70%+ voting for [Na]tional So[zi]al[ism] with 51% on welfare; there's plenty of *earning* immigrants could do to close that gap.
1. Reduce taxes and regulations to a reasonable level (or below).
2. Watch economic growth take off.
3. Watch high-end foreign talent try to land good jobs in the USA.
I'm just a working class guy and I know little about the rarified world of PHDs and Doctorates that my betters like Dr. Jill Biden live in. But I've always believed, with what I think is good evidence, that most of them are the lowest form of life and pose a grave threat to the species. Some I assume are good people. Having said that, It's pretty obvious that if some wetback can put up the bullshit we call academia for six or eight years and be awarded a degree in gender studies they should indeed be legally allowed to mow my lawn. And attend to other tasks that this American doesn't want to do.
Don't leave out the welfare.
They're entitled to lots of it.
Gotta show those taxpayers who's boss.
I spent some time in academia. Some of the smartest people I know have phds, and so do all of the dumbest
Illegal immigrants rape and murder an American woman 3 times a week!
True. But they're inlaws and they get arrested at the state border.
It's not me. It's sarcasmic, KAR/DOL or Jeff.
Saw a grey box and clicked on user name. Got fooled. Back into the box for him.
Fuck off, Troll. I hope an angry dad catches you.
Not parody:
https://reason.com/2024/06/27/no-one-defended-immigration-at-the-first-presidential-debate/?comments=true#comment-10620083
Apparently, illegals are murdering and raping American children three times a week.
Oh, and also not parody:
https://reason.com/2024/06/27/no-one-defended-immigration-at-the-first-presidential-debate/?comments=true#comment-10620727
No, no, nothing authoritarian at all about the government grabbing human beings off the street, throwing them in a box and 'disappearing' them.
You can't make this shit up. You all desperately want to have it both ways - to pretend that you are defenders of liberty while you support vile authoritarian measures to 'disappear' the illegals.
She must be tired of it by now.
https://x.com/CCrowley100/status/1806895206681497638?t=ae-2XTaN4xLdkj8SJCogFg&s=19
"Across the political spectrum, Americans assert that any form of White racial consciousness or solidarity is despicable. Whites, therefore, have tried to keep their end of the civil rights bargain. They have dismantled and condemned their own racial identity in the expectation that others will do the same."
— Jared Taylor, "White Identity: Racial Consciousness in the 21st Century."
America has been balkanized for years and continues to fragment demographically.
Demography is electoral destiny.
BIPOC communities vote based on ethnic interests, while Whites vote along ideological lines.
BIPOC interests are tangible, economic, and ethnically motivated. White interests are intangible, moral, and premised upon a colorblind idea of America that doesn't exist.
WE NEED TO TAKE OUR OWN SIDE!
Almost no one is on your side, Nazi.
"Nazi"
to Nardz, that is a compliment
Muted.
Here's a better idea: we have millions of young people who are virtually unemployable and living as parasites because they did not receive a competent elementary and secondary education. Instead of importing scholars from other countries, why don't we try actually educating American children so that they can get degrees and professional careers?
No motivation. The parasites get ?free? ponies all the time. Something about leading an UN-thirsty horse to water.
We should invest them, especially getting them into the trades and other neglected professions. But not everyone is suited to be, say, an electrical engineer. Hence immigrants. Having access to strong labor market composed of workers with a broad set of skills ultimately helps American businesses and grows our GDP, creating even more jobs.
Mute List: JesseAz, Sevo,daveca
51% (over half) are making their 'jobs' on the welfare system.
Mathematically that is a net NEGATIVE.
Since these students are so valuable, isn't is immoral for us to take them away from their home countries, many of which are struggling shitholes who could really use more highly educated people?
Their home countries typically have thin capital markets and poor job prospects. From a humanist perspective, it's better they earn high wages in the US and send some of the money back home.
Mute List: JesseAz, Sevo,daveca
Huh…. How did such a country of valuables end up with poor job prospects and thin capital markets? Did the fairy-queen wave a wand and make it so or did the very ‘valuables’ of that nation make it that way?
How about the export 2 to import 1 rule?
It is a good thing that billionaires Dell, Gates, Allen, and Ellison were not foreign born students. None finished college.
I know right. They might have been born in a nation where the citizens had governed away all the free-enterprise. Something they should be glad we didn't import until just lately.
A Trump campaign spokesperson quickly tempered that proposal, promising an “aggressive vetting process” that would “exclude all communists, radical Islamists, Hamas supporters, America haters and public charges.”
I’d be on board with that only if the word “all” there means “all from any communist or islamic nations.” (In fact, we should really be travel banning even just the tourists and visitors.)
Because those aren’t graduates. They’re not being sent here to take advantage of America’s laughable “education” system. Those are spies and saboteurs, infiltrating and running the long game in spycraft.
Old and Busted: We welcome dissidents fleeing persecution from communist regimes.
The New Hotness: Just stay put and die in your gulag, you aren't wanted here.
They're not "fleeing persecution." They're infiltrating, reporting back, and reverse engineering.
Yeah you're right. Those Coptic Christians are really crypto-Muslims.
I was referring more to the Chinamen.
I’d be on board with that only if the word “all” there means “all from any communist or islamic nations.”
So, that would be a “no” on letting in the Coptic Christians from Egypt?
How about the Buddhist Tibetans from Communist China? Also a no?
Three-year period of evaluation and education in American civics/culture, stationed in Puerto Rico. Mandatory cut all ties with country of origin. All communications for the rest of their life monitored.
We've already seen what happens when we trust people from the worst parts of the world. We're allowed to be cautious and guarded now.
Three-year period of evaluation and education in American civics/culture, stationed in Puerto Rico. Mandatory cut all ties with country of origin. All communications for the rest of their life monitored.
I see. So, kinda like putting them in a camp where they can concentrate on their studies.
No, more like trust but verify. Extreme vetting, and it gives them time to abandon their old broken cultures and adapt to American culture.
Three years is plenty of time to learn English and American civics. Admittedly, rethinking Puerto Rico on that. Maybe Guam.
In fact, hell with it. Let's do that with ALL immigrants. Three years, learn the language, assimilate to the culture. Plenty of time to run deep background checks on you. Make it so that only the people who are truly serious about becoming Americans, become Americans.
And if Guam fills up, sorry - no more immigrants until there's room on the island for them to begin their three year investigation/education.
Because nothing says libertarianism like a massive surveillance state and mandatory conformance to the will of the collective. Got it.
Fine, go with Ilhan Omar instead. Get what you ask for.
I've been flagging fake ml comments
We hired a Indian national straight out of a top US graduate program. His H1B lottery did not go through so he was forced back to India. We subsequently set up an Indian PLC, hired our employee back at his normal US salary, and then hired a half dozen Indian nationals at 1/4 US prevailing wages. Taxes on their salary now go to the Indian government, and all of their wages are spent within India, not the United States.
Lesson: Anti-immigration policies can lead to negative consequences for the US.
Mute List: JesseAz, Sevo,daveca,Nardz