Comment from Jaime Sabel

[200.205, 200.340] To Whom it May Concern: I am the Director of a Center for Life Sciences Education and an Associate Professor in Molecular Genetics. 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. Science works best if it is subject to review by experts in the field. The feedback from these experts is crucial to improving the work proposed. Scientists know best what the areas and topics are that need the most attention and dedicated funding. This should remain a scientific process, not a political process. Termination of grant funding for political reasons is extremely negatively impactful on the work that I do. That funding helps support undergraduate and graduate students and postdoctoral scholars who are the future of science. Additionally, my work focuses on biology education research and so impacts the way we teach students. Without this type of research, students are not receiving the best possible education. I believe this rule would severely limit scientific advancement and hurt both current and future scientists.