----------------------------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 ------------------------------------------------------------- ------------