Comment from Shuai Leng
Shuai LengOpposeAcademic
Summary: A Professor of Medical Physics opposes the proposed revisions to federal financial assistance regulations, arguing that they undermine the integrity of the peer review process. The commenter expresses concern that the ability of political appointees to override peer review and the potential for arbitrary grant termination will jeopardize scientific research and long-term technological development.
[200.205, 200.340]
To Whom it May Concern:
I am a Professor in Medical Physics.
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.
Peer review has been a cornerstone of research fundings. If political appointees have the authority to override peer review, it would jeopardize the scientific process and rigorous of grant review. It won't ensure high quality, critical scientific research be funded and conducted.
Scientific research takes time and talents. Having stable funding is critical to secure talents to conduct research. If active grants can be terminated at any time, PIs and institutes can't hire research personnel with this uncertainty. Additionally, researchers can't conduct long term research without stability, potentially results in only short term, superficial research being conducted. We can't advance science and technology in that way.
This change will jeopardize the integrity of grant process and negatively impact the science and technology development, a corner stone of our country that enables US leading the world.