Comment from Lucinda Sisk
Lucinda SiskOpposeAcademic
Summary: A developmental neuroscientist opposes the proposed changes to 2 CFR, arguing that they grant political appointees too much power over scientific grant funding. The commenter contends that these changes would compromise scientific independence and hinder critical research in public health, medicine, and technology.
I am a developmental neuroscientist writing to voice strong opposition to the Office of Management and Budget’s proposed changes to 2 CFR that would enable political appointees unprecedented power in overseeing scientific grant funding. Allowing this to change to take effect would directly threaten scientific independence and hand power over what should and should not be studied to partisan non-experts. The US scientific enterprise is among the best in the world, but enacting these changes would vastly compromise its ability to conduct critical basic and translational science relevant for public health, medical breakthroughs, technology, and preserving ecosystems and biodiversity.