Bill Overview
Title: Restoring Fulbright Exchanges with China and Hong Kong Act
Description: This bill nullifies the portion of Executive Order 13936 that terminated the Fulbright exchange program with respect to exchanges with China and Hong Kong.
Sponsors: Rep. Larsen, Rick [D-WA-2]
Target Audience
Population: people involved in educational and cultural exchanges between China, Hong Kong, and other countries
Estimated Size: 5000
- The Fulbright Program is a prestigious cultural and educational exchange program that operates in over 160 countries.
- The bill specifically focuses on restoring exchange opportunities with China and Hong Kong.
- Prior to its suspension, the U.S.-China Fulbright Program involved a substantial number of students, scholars, and educators between the two regions.
- Benefits will extend largely to academic institutions, educators, students, and scholars in both the U.S., China, and Hong Kong.
- Cultural exchanges are integral for enhancing mutual understanding and diplomacy between the nations involved.
Reasoning
- The Fulbright Program is prestigious and impacts a relatively small, specialized group consisting primarily of academicians and professionals involved in education and cultural exchanges.
- The budgetary constraints of $95M in year 1 suggest that the program will be re-initiated with a significant, though not exhaustive, outreach given it historically involved substantial numbers but is still limited in scope compared to other educational programs.
- The American segment of those directly affected by the policy will likely align with the reported targeted estimate of 5000 participants, including students, scholars, educators, and institutional coordinators.
- As most interested participants are associated with higher education institutions, their baseline well-being might already be above average given educationally rich environments but not immune to broad political tensions which had previously caused cancellation.
- The re-initiation would likely bring about moderate improvements in well-being scores as opportunities for academic growth and international engagement resume.
Simulated Interviews
University Educator (New York, NY)
Age: 34 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The suspension of the Fulbright Program significantly hindered academic discussions and collaborations.
- Restoring the program will enhance academic insights and cultural understanding.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Graduate Student (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 24 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I was very frustrated when the exchange opportunities were halted.
- The policy opens doors for my academic research and career prospects.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Cultural Exchange Coordinator (Chicago, IL)
Age: 29 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It was disheartening to see our programs cut, affecting cultural dialogues.
- Restoring Fulbright will energize our projects and partnerships.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Dean of Humanities (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 55 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- These exchanges are pivotal for intellectual diversity and academic excellence.
- The reinstatement will allow lost activities to be picked up, creating lasting impacts.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
PhD Candidate (Boston, MA)
Age: 27 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The cancelation was a setback for my research.
- Re-opening the program enables necessary fieldwork and immersion.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Research Scientist (Austin, TX)
Age: 41 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 8.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It limits my access to collaborative networks which are now crucial.
- Restoration ensures the growth of academic networks.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Non-Profit Director (Portland, OR)
Age: 30 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Resuming those connections equips youth with essential global competencies.
- It's an essential step for cultural diplomacy.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Policy Analyst (Seattle, WA)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The shutdown was a loss for cultural dialogue and policy-progress.
- Bringing it back aligns with fostering global insights.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Undergraduate Student (Miami, FL)
Age: 19 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This change revives hope for unique learning experiences abroad.
- It's a vital step for educational transparency and opportunities.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Government Advisor (Washington, D.C.)
Age: 50 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Reinstating the Fulbright is a pragmatic step for diplomatic engagement.
- It's crucial for ongoing cultural and academic partnerships with China.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $95000000 (Low: $85000000, High: $105000000)
Year 2: $90000000 (Low: $80000000, High: $100000000)
Year 3: $90000000 (Low: $80000000, High: $100000000)
Year 5: $90000000 (Low: $80000000, High: $100000000)
Year 10: $90000000 (Low: $80000000, High: $100000000)
Year 100: $90000000 (Low: $80000000, High: $100000000)
Key Considerations
- Reinstating the program strengthens cultural and educational ties, improving diplomacy and potentially easing other bilateral tensions.
- Inflation and increased travel and security costs necessitate proper budgeting to ensure program sustainability.
- The program may yield indirect long-term economic, cultural, and diplomatic benefits that are intangible but significant.