Proposed Recission of the International Education Programs Regulations

The commenter opposes the proposed rescission of the International Education Programs Regulations. They argue that the current guidelines are necessary to ensure that awards and scholarships are based on academic merit rather than administrative discretion to protect international research cooperation.

A faculty member at an R1 university opposes the proposed rescission, arguing that it lacks specific details on replacement procedures and could allow for funding decisions based on political interests rather than academic merit. They emphasize the importance of maintaining peer review processes for federal grants.

The commenter, a historian and former Fulbright recipient, opposes the proposed rescission because they believe it replaces objective, merit-based selection with political patronage. They argue the rule would reduce transparency, create uncertainty for applicants, and weaken the administration of programs established by Congress.

A professor of Latin American history opposes the proposed rescission, arguing that the revisions do not adequately ensure the impartial peer review process necessary to maintain the credibility of international education programs.

An emeritus professor from UW Bothell opposes the proposed rescission, arguing that it would lead to politicized and arbitrary selection criteria for international education programs. The commenter emphasizes that long-term academic investments should not be subject to "flighty and unstable" current events or bureaucratic whims.