Comment on FR Doc # 2026-13248

Consistent, de-politicized selection criteria are good. The proposed rule change opens us to arbitrary shifts in criteria depending on whoever won the last election. When Fulbright-Hays was established, international affairs were also "ever-changing." Applicants should not be whipsawed by the temporary enthusiasms of bureaucrats. The proposed changes ignore timing. For a graduate student, the span of time from setting up their studies to be eligible, (including writing and defending a fundable dissertation prospectus), applying, doing the funded work, and writing it up is five years at the very least, and the long-term benefits for their teaching and research follow, let us hope, over a career of several decades. It makes sense to review regional allocations from time to time, but "responsive to current events" misunderstands what is being supported. Apart from the threat to academic rigor, then, we are looking at a classic problem that afflicts planned economies: politicized state authorities set themselves up to do fine-grained allocation of long-term investment on the basis of current needs that are by their nature flighty and unstable. I'm an Emeritus Professor retired from UW Bothell. I received Fulbright support for dissertation research in Mexico in 1993.