Comment on FR Doc # 2026-13248

I am a professor of Russian history and a former Fulbright-Hays fellowship recipient; I write in opposition to this proposal, because I strongly believe in the importance of international educations programs like Fulbright-Hays and Title VI and because rescinding the regulations surrounding these programs will make them less transparent and less reliable. America really needs higher education to train graduate students and other scholars in the study of the wider world. We need this for an informed citizenry, for a well-functioning government, and for the strong international connections that benefit our economy. Other sources--like a July 2025 letter to appropriators from the Coalition for International Education--have spoken eloquently about how international education serves American national interests. I can also speak to the importance of the Fulbright-Hays program in my own career and in the careers of my students. A Fulbright-Hays fellowship in 2005 enabled me to complete my dissertation research on the Soviet regime's efforts to shape the behavior of citizens through party discipline proceedings, to complete my book on that subject, and to begin a research career that now focuses on how the KGB cracked down on dissidents and nonconformists in the Baltic republics and beyond. This fellowship also helped launch my teaching career--in which I have helped students conduct research in Soviet history covering topics like the crackdown on religious dissent under communism, the use of police informers to control society, and more. My students include several graduates who have gone on to study Russian history themselves and others with career interests in national security. I can also say that the uncertainty of grant and fellowship support has hindered my own research plans (both in graduate school and more recently), and that my students have been greatly affected by funding cuts to fellowship programs when they went on to graduate school in related areas. Studying a topic related to the world outside the US takes years of dedication; when students don't know if financial support will be available, they will be less likely to get training in international education--training that will pay off for decades, as past funding recipients train future students and build the expertise that America needs in these areas. Fulbright-Hays was dealt some significant cuts in 2025, and these policy changes threaten the program still further. The existing regulations provide transparency, flexibility, and reliability, and I have yet to see a convincing case (or any case) that they make for inefficient program administration. Maybe there are specific changes that would strengthen the program, but it benefits no one if we rescind these regulations in their entirety and inject greater uncertainty into the program.