Almost all of us can remember America’s reaction to 9/11. In the days following the horrendous event many defensive initiatives were taken and, since two of the perpetrators were foreign students, one reaction was to restrict access to America’s colleges and universities. Barriers were imposed overseas, visas became difficult if not impossible to get. Personnel in American embassies were frosty, if not outright rude, to inquiries from those interested in enrolling as undergraduate or graduate students. When I was traveling in China, numerous students told me about their visa problems. Later, in a meeting in Beijing with our ambassador, he acknowledged the unusual circumstances and the problems they were causing both for his staff and Chinese nationals.
I myself received calls from several Middle Eastern ambassadors to the U.S. asking if I couldn’t be helpful to their constituents. The U.S. authorities stood firm. Students who had contemplated studying in the U.S. redirected themselves to schools in Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, the United Kingdom, and other more welcoming English-speaking countries.
Time passed and little by little, with the help of university presidents, dedicated public servants and leadership in the Departments of Commerce and State, and interested members of Congress in both the House and the Senate, steps were taken to rationalize our hospitality. We recognized the need for prudence, we understood the case for security, but we also perceived the role that universities played in articulating America’s foreign policy, and incidentally, as an export industry. It was important that persons from other countries studying in the U.S. come to know our values and return home able to make the case for America; it was also important that our campuses have the benefit of students from the Middle East, Asia, Africa, Europe and all other parts of the World.
In the years that have passed since the attacks on the World Trade Center, the Pentagon, and in Pennsylvania, accommodations have been made and, even as we’ve remained vigilant, we’ve found ways to slowly restore the number of international students in our ranks, which had been depleted. Applications to graduate schools, in particular, have been coming back year by year. Last year was particularly robust; China and India have been sending students to our shores with renewed vigor. Conservative U.S. visa practices seem to have become more flexible. And it appeared that a return to normal, pre-Osama bin Laden conditions might be in our future.
This seemed to be a good thing, one of the too few areas where America and the rest of the world might be successfully working together. You can imagine my surprise when I read the other day that the U.S. Department of Homeland Security is considering doubling the fee that international students were going to be required to pay when they applied for visas. The numbers aren’t consequential in the larger scheme of things, going from $100 to $200. Some will argue that the differential is not going to make that much difference, and I agree. But at a time when American universities are being asked to control their tuition increases, the optics seem to me so contrary to avowed sentiments that they are quite maddening. Have we been abandoned by Madison Avenue?
Apparently the money is to help offset the expense of keeping track of where international students are once they’ve entered the country. A good idea badly executed. Our new efforts at internal surveillance and accounting for people in the U.S. on F-1 visas and J-1 visas have run up some costs. The increased fees would compensate for the expense and upgrading of the Student Exchange Visitor Program Information System, an automated database. Surely the money involved cannot be significant compared to the cost of the symbolism. Just as enrollments of foreign students in our universities are beginning to flourish, we contemplate a negative initiative, something likely to discourage, however modestly, rather than encourage consideration of study in the 50 states (plus the District of Columbia).
It may not be too late for us to help our government perfect their planning in this regard. The idea is still in gestation and may still be addressed by offering public commentary until June 30th to the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. They are asking for you to tell them what you think by going to the www.regulations.gov Web site or by fax at 866-466-5370. The new rates are to go live on October 1, 2008.
Uncle Sam needs you.
