Comment on FR Doc # 2026-13248

As a former Fulbright recipient (Taiwan, 2011; Cambodia, 2022) and former Director for a National Resource Center (University of Hawai'i at Manoa, Southeast Asia), I write to ask the DOE to refrain from deregulating the HEA Title VI and Fulbright-Hays 102(b)(6) programs for several reasons. First, federal deregulation in the business sector may enhance our economy, but deregulation in the Education sector leaves it open for businesses to assume responsibilities to educate our public. That's not their job and that's not their expertise, and it's clear in the justification that DOE wants to pursue non-grant options to some programs that will open this system to private contractors with greater financial and educational priorities. We need an educated public, and Title VI programs help us achieve that goal. As just two examples, our Center has used Title VI funding to develop high-caliber, accreditable distance learning programs in Southeast Asian studies and multiple K-12 outreach programs to bolster our state's limited public education budget. Doing those activities through a business would have more than tripled the cost, and we make our materials available to the public. Second, the DOE argues that these steps will make the department more "nimble" and allow applicants more "creativity" but multiple amendments since the legislation's creation suggests that the system has in-built flexibility (it is already "nimble") and -- were DOE to read any of the hundreds of funded NRC applications -- applicants are deeply creative in their approaches to judiciously using federal funding. I myself have directed and/or participated in National Resource Center activities that have trained public educators, created public museum exhibits, generated open-access educational materials, facilitated public talks, and trained hundreds of students in more than six Southeast Asian languages: all for a pittance of what it would cost for private sector entities to run. Title VI and Fulbright-Hays programs are economical and they work: no good reason exists to change them from an assessment perspective. They also help innumerable first-gen and low-income students gain invaluable opportunities that not only make them global citizens, but in many cases help them graduate from college. Deregulation for deregulation's sake is misguided, and I urge the DOE to keep education as its primary priority. Please protect Title VI and the Fulbright-Hays program. These are extremely effective soft-power tools for the United States in their current form, and cost a fraction of what other forms of diplomacy require for the United States to thrive in a global context. Thank you very much.