Comment from Gregory Fuchs

[200.432, 200.454, 200.461, 200.206, 200.450] To Whom it May Concern: I am a professor of Applied and Engineering Physics at Cornell University. My experimental research group specializes in quantum systems, devices, and materials, especially defect spins in wide bandgap materials, superconducting quantum circuits, and magnetic materials/devices. I am writing in my personal capacity to oppose the proposed revisions to sections 200.432, 200.454, 200.461, 200.206, and 200.450 that would restrict typical professional expenses, curtail the communication of scientific results, and place excessive scrutiny on the activities of scientists. I am a fellow of the American Physical Society (APS), and a member of the IEEE and Optica. These societies sustain our fields and careers by hosting conferences, organizing workshops, providing educational opportunities, and running our most important journals. They are central to our scientific efforts. Section 200.432 is especially problematic because conferences are the venue where new ideas are developed and shared. Research does not occur in a vacuum -- it needs to be nurtured with human interaction, contact with new ideas, and unexpected questions from others. It is often the case that new ideas and new, exciting research directions come from attending a conference that I normally do not attend, where I am exposed to ideas that I didn't know but also see where my own approach can solve problems encountered by the other community. This is an essential part of scientific progress. The ability to publish and read research papers in journals is central to the scientific advancement of the United States. Section 200.461 is problematic because journal publications are the record of our progress and the central means by which we assure quality. Of course that costs some money, but those costs are modest, especially for society journals like those of the APS, the ACS, the IEEE, and Optica. In the past three years I have published 18 peer-reviewed papers (which is about average for me). These papers not only record and disseminate the outcomes of our research, but they form a key aspect of student training. Additionally, by publishing those results, I am regularly approached with new collaborative opportunities, which further drives our accomplishments forward. Any changes that limit the ability to attend conferences and workshops or publish papers will negatively impact my research, the training of my students, and the progress of science in the United States. These proposed changes will damage the US scientific engine to our great detriment.