Comment from Frederik Paerels
Frederik PaerelsOpposeAcademic
Summary: A professor of astronomy opposes the proposed revisions to federal financial assistance regulations, arguing that they allow for political overrides and subjective criteria in grant funding. The commenter contends that such interference undermines scientific merit, creates funding unpredictability, and will negatively impact the training of future scientists.
[200.205, 200.340]
To Whom it May Concern:
I am a professor of astronomy, and I have been conducting research in X-ray astronomy for 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.
Review of grant proposals, and their evaluation, is always based on scientific merit in my field, and you have to be a trained scientist to evaluate proposed ideas. Political override will therefore completely obstruct research.
If grants can be terminated on subjective criteria, not based on science, the unpredictability of funding will severely disrupt the development of my field, and thwart the education of the younger generation of US scientists.
Science only works if it can make its own decisions. Outside interference by non-scientists is counterproductive, and will have a severe negative impact on US science, and the ability of the US to train a new generation. One only has to look at the former Soviet Union to see what 'government directed' science under political direction looks like.