Comment from Susan DiFranzo
Susan DiFranzoOpposeAcademic
Summary: An associate professor of physics opposes the proposed revisions to federal grant review regulations. The commenter argues that allowing political appointees to make funding decisions rather than scientists will undermine research integrity and create instability for scientific planning.
[200.205, 200.340]
To Whom it May Concern:
I am an associate professor of physics and have been teaching physics for more than 30 years.
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.
Only other scientists have the understanding and knowledge to decide on the validity of grants. Having a political appointee decide based on factors other than science would irreparably harm research in this country.
Having the possibility of a grant terminated at any time hanging over our heads means that we are taking a risk in hiring and planning.
This rule would put science not in the hands of scientists, but rather at the whims of a political appointee. Many scientific advances that we now rely on were at one point proposals to explore some abstract idea. It was only after the work was done that the importance and practical uses were revealed. Much of the greatness of this country rests on the scientific advances we have made.