Comment from Ethan Baker

[200.205, 200.340] To Whom it May Concern: I am a PhD Candidate at Boston University studying theoretical particle physics and cosmology, trying to understand the fundamental nature of the universe. I am writing in my personal capacity to oppose the proposed revisions to sections 200.205 and 200.340 that would undermine the integrity of federal grant review processes and federal science agencies' ability to identify and fund impactful research. Research is a long process and requires intense effort to make substantive progress. If grants can be terminated for political reasons at any time, fewer discoveries will be made since researchers will not be able to take risks and work on bold ideas that take a long time to implement. For example, my past grant-funded research projects began as something completely different than what they evolved into. Ultimately, however, the end product was more impactful than our original proposal. If grants can be terminated at any time like Section 200.340 proposes, then this impactful research would not have succeeded. Political interference in scientific grants will upend the scientific process and will greatly inhibit American innovation. The USA is currently a scientific leader, but political interference will cause researchers to take fewer risks and will risk the credibility of science.