A new proposed accreditation rule is expected imminently, and higher education leaders are calling for active participation during the comment period to shape what ultimately becomes final oversight requirements. The perspective argues that the Department of Education can revise negotiated rulemaking language in response to public comments under Administrative Procedure Act procedures, meaning stakeholder consensus from earlier phases is not automatically preserved. The piece urges accreditors and institutions to distinguish between provisions worth maintaining and provisions that could increase expense, intrusion, or unintended governance burdens. It highlights the risk that prior “consensus” edits could be rolled back during rule finalization if commenters fail to engage. For universities, the immediate action is procedural: submit detailed comments during the window, so the final rule reflects both policy intent and workable implementation costs in accreditation operations.