Comment from Catherine Badgley
Catherine BadgleyOpposeAcademic
Summary: A vertebrate paleontologist and scientist argues against the proposed rule, stating that it introduces arbitrary political control over federal research funding. The commenter expresses concern that the rule will undermine the peer-review process, harm scientific careers, and diminish the standing of US science.
I am writing in opposition to this proposed new rule from OMB (2026-0034-0001). I write as a scientist, with training in Earth Sciences and Biology; I am a vertebrate paleontologist. I am fortunate that my research has been funded over several decades by multiple grants from both the earth science division and the biological science division of the National Science Foundation.
It is essential that the peer-review process be maintained without political interference. Also, notices of new funding programs need to be made available in a timely manner. Grants, once awarded, need to be maintained reliably through their full authorized time period.
Giving arbitrary, political control over the oversight of federal funding of scientific research will diminish the standing of US science and will undermine public confidence in the process and outcomes of federally funded research. The careers of many talented scientists will be harmed by the OMB ruling. This ruling should not go through. The existing process, even if not perfect, is far better than what is proposed in this new set of rules.