Comment from Sarbani Basu

[200.205, 200.340] To Whom it May Concern: I am a professor of astronomy. 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. The US has been at the forefront of research since World War II and this has been made possible because of research that was funded through strict peer review that ensured the integrity (and importance) of the research. The proposed change subverts this process, and endangers the US advantage in science. Many countries are already at par with the US, and weakening the peer review system to reward political ideologies will push the US back many decades. A sudden termination of grants will, of course, be harmful to the research, but what will be worse is the effect on people entering the field. Termination of grants will mean graduate students will have to leave, and post-docs will leave the field. This will set back US science by a generation. It takes time, effort, and money to train the next generation of scientists, and the proposed change will be disastrous to the science pipeline. These proposed changes would be detrimental to science in the US. The US will lose its preeminent position as a country that advances human knowledge. And worse, it can destroy the pipeline into STEM careers.