Comment from James Brooks
James BrooksOpposeAcademic
Summary: A Stanford University professor opposes the proposed rule, arguing that it would allow political appointees to interfere with research funding decisions. The commenter expresses concern that such administrative meddling will damage research infrastructure, competitiveness, and the recruitment of young scientists.
The proposed rule allows political appointees to interfere with research funding decisions. The current system has allowed research in the US to flourish since WWII. This has conferred huge economic benefits to the US, and saved lives. The past 15 months has shown us what politically motivated attacks on science can do - funding has slowed to a snails pace, leading to a dimantling of research infrastructure in the US broadly. As an educator (Professor at Stanford University), I have directly witnessed smart young people become dispirited with research, and either not entering the field or quitting the field altogether. This is damaging our research competitiveness. Please do not add a layer of administrative meddling to our research funding system. Please do not allow this rule to go through!