----------------------------Original message----------------------------
the following petition in support of international programs is being
circulated widely in social science lists. please excuse cross postings.
(this is not an ad for a new lawn care service.)
p. mchaffie
---------- Forwarded message ----------
>Date: Mon, 18 Sep 1995 21:57:19 -0600
>From: James W Oberly (Jim Oberly, Dept. of History, UWEC) <[log in to unmask]>
>o: Multiple recipients of list H-RURAL <[log in to unmask]>
>ubject: Petition: Call to save U.S. funding of Int'l Exchanges <long>
H-Rural subscribers:
The following call to action on the part of U.S. academics comes to
us from faculty in the History Department at Ohio State University.
========================================================================
Philip C. Brown, Department of History, Ohio State University, 230 West 17th
Avenue, Columbus OH 43210; 614-292--0904; [log in to unmask]
Support for Federal Funding of International Education and
Research
Current Congressional bills in various stages of passage
propose substantial reductions in funding for education in
general, and education and research related programs in the
humanities and social sciences in particular. In response to
early proposals, supporters generally stressed the value of some
programs, notably the National Endowment for the Humanities and
the National Endowment for the Arts, to local communities and to
promoting an understanding of the American cultural heritage. As
a result of substantial outcry, significant federal funding for
several programs was diverted to the states. By contrast, the
international programs (e.g., Fulbright-Hays and Title VI
programs), and the substantial international components of NEA,
the National Science Foundation, and NEH received much less
attention.
The most serious reductions in international programs have
been avoided but their long-term continuation is still in
question. In the past, a relatively small group of powerful
people in Congress (e.g., J. William Fulbright) could fend off
opponents of federal support for international programs. Recent
events make it clear that this approach is no longer so effec-
tive. The appearance before a Congressional committee of
professional association representatives also has less impact
than it once had.
To assure the viability of federal international programs, we
must find a new, more broadly based approach to cultivating
Congressional support. Broad and consistent education of
Congress on the importance of these federal programs is now
essential. Although efforts may be useful as specific bills come
up for a vote, we can no longer simply await a particular crisis.
This effort must be consistent and long-term. It must help our
Senators and Representatives understand the impact of these
programs beyond the big research centers and beyond the
traditional boundaries of area studies programs.
We encourage professional associations to take a more active
role in mobilizing their membership in support of federal
international programs. Miriam Kazanjian, a consultant for the
Coalition for International Education, and Page Putnam Miller,
Director of the National Coordinating Committee for the Promotion
of History, have actively provided timely information to several
e-mail lists (Title VI, H-Net), and the willingness of editors of
those lists to forward their reports has been helpful.
Nonetheless, other professional associations need to be more
visibly active with both their members and Congress.
Responsibility for support of international education and
research programs does not rest alone with professional
associations, of course. We encourage interested colleagues to
take the following actions:
Speaking from your own perspective and experiences:
1. As the Senate meets to consider its version of the budget
this September, write/fax/e-mail Senator Arlen Specter,
the chair, and other Labor, Health and Human Services,
and Education committee members (listed below, Appendix
II) to express support for the continuation of last
year's expenditures for international programs and the
international components of agencies such as NEH, NSF,
and NEA. Some of the reasons we have employed in our own
letters follow, but what will strengthen your letter most
is to recount the ways in which your work and perspec-
tives have benefited from the opportunities provided by
federal programs in international education and research.
2. Write/fax/e-mail your own Senators to express your
support and to encourage them to speak to Senator Specter
and other Labor, HHS and Education committee members on
behalf full funding for international education.
3. As Congress meets to resolve differences in the House and
Senate bills which bear on international education, write
your Senators and Representatives in support of
continuation of last year's funding for Title VI,
Fulbright-Hays, and other international programs.
Encourage them to speak to the House and Senate
leadership in favor of these programs. Such efforts can
still have a significant bearing on next year's programs.
Expanding the network:
4. Encourage similar communication by non-area studies
specialists and pre-collegiate educators who have
benefited from consultations with area studies centers,
overseas teaching experience and visits, or the visits of
foreign scholars and educators here (e.g., by collabo-
ration with foreign scholars or discovering
insights/problems that came through discussions with non-
Americans). Their comments will demonstrate to members
of the House and Senate that the concrete impact of these
programs extends far beyond college/university area
studies specialists.
5. Actively encourage present and former students (whether
foreign areas studies majors or not) to write their
Senators and Representatives to explain how much the
presence of vibrant offerings in international studies
has meant to their academic, professional, and personal
development.
6. Encourage timely and vigorous advocacy by professional
associations in favor of sustained federal commitment to
international programs. Traditional methods which rely
on newsletter items are not adequate in the current
situation. Members should be mobilized using existing
internet and World Wide Web sites or creating new ones as
necessary. Such efforts should be a long-term,
continuing function that supplements and extends
professional association monitoring of and advocacy
concerning government policy regarding international re-
search and education.
7. Add your name and specialty to this list and circulate it
to like-minded colleagues, friends, and officers of
relevant professional associations to which you belong.
Thank you for your support.
Kenneth Andrien, Latin American History
Professor, Ohio State University
M. Les Benedict, American Constitutional History
Professor, Ohio State University
Mansel Blackford, Business History
Professor, Ohio State University
Philip C. Brown, Japanese/East Asian History
Associate Professor, Ohio State University
Samuel Chu, Chinese History
Emeritus Professor, Ohio State University
Carter Findley, Islamic Civilization
Professor, Ohio State University
Carole Fink, European International History
Professor, Ohio State University
John F. Guilmartin, Jr., Military History, Early Modern
Europe
Associate Professor, Ohio State University
Kermit Hall, American Legal History,
Professor, Ohio State University and Dean, College of
Humanities
Jane Hathaway, Islamic and World History
Assistant Professor, Ohio State University
Michael Hogan, Diplomatic History
Professor, Ohio State University and Chair, Department of
History
Austin Kerr, American Business History
Professor, Ohio State University
Eve Levin, Russian History
Associate Professor, Ohio State University
Allan R. Millett, Military History
Professor, Ohio State University
Warren Van Tine, U.S. Social History
Professor, Ohio State University
-------------------------------------------------------------
------------
|
