Russell Vought is going to destroy American Science
6 hours ago
- #Political Interference
- #Science Funding
- #Federal Grants Policy
- Political appointees are required to conduct pre-issuance reviews of discretionary grants, applying criteria that align with the President's priorities and can block awards on topics like denying the sex binary, illegal immigration, or anti-American values.
- Peer review recommendations are made advisory and non-binding, allowing political appointees to override scientific community judgments without cause.
- The undefined 'Gold Standard Science' concept is used as a political test for grants, prioritizing compliance over institutional prestige and historical reputation.
- Active grants can be terminated mid-award for being inconsistent with program goals or agency priorities, without requiring noncompliance or fraud findings.
- Grant funds are prohibited from supporting DEI policies, gender ideology, or gender transition assistance for individuals under 19, with violations risking termination.
- International scientific collaboration is broadly prohibited with covered foreign countries, disrupting partnerships in fields like climate science and genomics.
- A domestic-first framework requires case-by-case justification for international elements in R&D grants, and foreign entities need senior appointee approval.
- Grant applicants can be denied based on affiliations with organizations deemed to advocate against the U.S. government or undermine security.
- E-Verify is mandated for all grant recipients and subrecipients, adding administrative burden and potentially jeopardizing grants for institutions employing foreign researchers.
- OMB claims direct binding authority over all agencies, eliminating flexibility for individual science agencies to shield communities from rule changes.
- Conference attendance using grant funds now requires express agency pre-approval and inclusion in award terms, isolating researchers from professional communities.
- Professional memberships require prior approval, subscriptions to journals are unallowable, and memberships in lobbying organizations are banned.
- Publication costs, including open access fees, are presumptively unallowable, conflicting with federal open access mandates and potentially suppressing scientific sharing.
- Public relations costs are restricted, limiting researchers' ability to communicate findings to the public or press.
- Grant funds cannot be used for issue advocacy, voter registration, or influencing state agencies, which could bar public discussion of politically sensitive research.
- Grant program goals must align with administration policies and priorities, rather than scientific need or expert consensus.
- Agency heads can exempt grant competitions from public notice for national security or national interest reasons, potentially hiding entire competitions.
- Grant eligibility can be restricted to specific nonprofit categories, such as excluding advocacy-affiliated organizations.
- OMB gains direct oversight of grant recipients, providing leverage over which institutions receive funding and injecting political interference.
- The rule dismantles the post-WWII system of merit-based science funding, replacing it with political control across the entire funding lifecycle.