Comment from Michela Biasutti

I am writing to strongly oppose this OMB regulation. I am a research professor with a 30-year career in weather and climate science. I came to the US as part of Italys brain drain because I was attracted to the best research environment in the world: one where good ideas are identified and supported, no matter where they come from. Young upstarts or established groups would make their case in a grant application, and the strength of the science would be the sole criterion for support. That was the intent and the promise of the partnership between the federal government and research universities, and that promise was, by and large, kept. This setup, together with the openness to foreign talent, is what made America a powerhouse in science and technology, a leader in scientific innovation and operationalization. All of this is profoundly threatened by the proposed OMB regulation. To give agencies more power to align grantmaking with White House priorities is a recipe for disaster: it means that people with no expertise in the field will pass judgment on what is the leading edge of knowledge in that field! Worse: they will have a strong interest in being swayed towards preconceived ideas by either a fondness for a political outcome or partisan misinformation. This is particularly obvious in the case of my own field, weather and climate science. The consequences will be dire for our ability to protect the nations infrastructure, economy, agriculture, public safety, and national security. Just as pernicious as the unwarranted authority given to politically appointed officials is the plethora of restrictions on critical professional activities, like work travel, and necessary expenditures like journal subscriptions and publication costs. Other provisions would make it difficult or impossible for researchers to collaborate with colleagues abroad, dealing another blow to the ability of American scientists to be at the forefront of research and seek the necessary expertise to advance their scientific agenda. Overall, this regulation is a frontal assault on US science. If implemented, it will make the nation lose its leadership position in STEM and it will contribute to making all of us poorer and less secure in the face of disease, natural disaster, and emerging technological threats. Do not go down this path.