H1B Holders, please submit a public comment to oppose the H1B Rule

[Coconut]

https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2025/09/24/2025-18473/weighted-selection-process-for-registrants-and-petitioners-seeking-to-file-cap-subject-h-1b

[megadheera]

18 minutes ago, Coconut said:

https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2025/09/24/2025-18473/weighted-selection-process-for-registrants-and-petitioners-seeking-to-file-cap-subject-h-1b

Can OPTs like me submit comments?

[Coconut]

7 minutes ago, megadheera said:

Can OPTs like me submit comments?

Yes…anyone who have internet 

[kevinUsa]

The US labor force has approximately 163 million employees. 85,000 jobs annually have a negligible impact on the US job market, with H-1Bs accounting for only 0.05% of the total annual employment.
I believe that encouraging entrepreneurs to create more than 100,000 jobs may be more effective. If a foreign entrepreneur wishes to establish a startup in an emerging industry (possibly with high growth potential) and primarily employ US workers, does the entrepreneur or foreign partner also need to pay the $100,000 fee? Is the application fee waived in cases where jobs are created for US citizens?

Venture-funded innovative startups struggle financially to afford the $100,000 annual application fee. This may not be a big deal for large companies, but it is a significant blow to startups, whose innovative energy is crucial to the long-term competitive advantage of US industry.

Many years ago, there was a man named Elon Musk who entered the US on an H-1B visa.
May all enterprising entrepreneurs and engineers (perhaps one in ten thousand of them will be the next Musk) successfully enter the US and realize the American dream.
God bless America.

[kevinUsa]

I am an international STEM graduate student currently studying in the United States on an F-1 visa. I came legally, pay substantially higher tuition than domestic students, and intend to work in fields (AI/CS) the U.S. has identified as national priorities.

Summary: I support fixing abuse in the H-1B system. However, the proposed wage-only weighted selection is a blunt tool that would punish legitimate U.S.-educated students and hollow out mid-level roles, while allowing sophisticated outsourcing operations to adapt around it. Please adopt a surgical approach that protects American workers and preserves the U.S. talent pipeline that universities and employers rely on.

Key Concerns
1.Blunt wage weighting misses the real target.
A single wage metric disadvantages entry-level U.S.-educated STEM graduates, especially in high-cost metros where prevailing wages are already high. Large outsourcing firms, meanwhile, can restructure filings (locations, titles, wage levels) to game the system.
2.Pipeline risk for universities and employers.
If F-1 students lose a fair path from OPT to H-1B, international enrollment will drop sharply. Universities depend on this revenue, and employers depend on these students becoming mid-level engineers two to five years later.
3.AI competitiveness requires full teams.
AI and other critical technologies need layered teams — seniors plus strong entry- and mid-level contributors. A wage-only filter biases toward a narrow elite and erodes the middle, slowing innovation, product safety, and delivery.
4.Cost-of-living distortions.
The same nominal salary maps to different wage levels across metros. An offer that is competitive in NYC or SF could rank “lower” than one in a smaller city, skewing selection away from top R&D hubs where much U.S. innovation happens.
5.Failure to surgically remove abuse.
The proposal does not directly address the actual source of system abuse — outsourcing firms and fraudulent consultancies. These companies should face stricter audits, higher fees, and closer review, rather than punishing students in accredited U.S. programs.

Suggested Fixes
1.Prioritize U.S.-educated STEM graduates from accredited, research-intensive (R1) universities.
2.Crack down on outsourcing firms and fraudulent consultancies by disfavoring third-party placement filings unless they include verified client letters and detailed project descriptions.
3.Introduce a tiered system: weight U.S. STEM degrees, shortage occupations, compliance history, and internships in the U.S., alongside wage.
4.Normalize wage levels for cost-of-living differences so large metro hubs are not unfairly penalized.
5.Grandfather current F-1/OPT cohorts and phase in changes, so current students are not suddenly(unfairly) trapped.

Conclusion

The U.S. benefits most when it welcomes highly trained international students who invest heavily in its universities. I urge DHS to replace the wage-only approach with a balanced framework that:
1.Protects American workers,
2.Eliminates abuse by outsourcing consultancies,
3.Supports U.S.-educated international students, and
4.Preserves both entry-level and middle-level jobs essential to the AI economy.

Respectfully submitted,
An International Graduate Student (F-1, STEM)