Comment from CAITLIN WITT
CAITLIN WITTOpposeAcademic
Summary: An assistant professor of physics and astronomy opposes the proposed revisions because they would restrict professional expenses, limit communication of scientific results, and increase scrutiny on scientists. The commenter argues that these changes would hinder the ability to train new scientists, collaborate on complex projects, and access the scientific record necessary for their career.
[200.432, 200.454, 200.461, 200.206, 200.450]
To Whom it May Concern:
I am an assistant professor in physics and astronomy.
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 would not still be a professional scientist without access to my professional societies, which Section 200.454 may cut off. Not only are they a community which helps develop new ideas, they are fundamental to training new generations of scientists and completing complex projects that one team cannot complete alone.
Conferences are critical for the advancement of my science. I work in large collaborations, and working together directly to plan the next direction of our science goals is irreplaceable.
We also rely on having access to the scientific record which Section 200.454 could restrict. My field has been growing for decades, and it's critical to read the existing literature in detail to ensure we do not duplicate effort.
As a member of this collaboration, I have published dozens of papers in academic journals, and my career relies upon this access.
Our profession would fundamentally change with these restrictions, as we would no longer be effectively able to train students and broaden our networks to further our science more effectively.