Comment from Brahmmi Patel
Brahmmi PatelOpposeAcademic
Summary: Brahmmi Patel, a PhD candidate at Yale University, opposes the proposed rule changes because they grant political appointees too much discretion over research grants. The commenter argues that these changes would undermine the peer-review process and potentially harm scientific advancement by prioritizing political goals over specialized research.
The Office of Management and Budget ,My name is Brahmmi Patel. I am a 6th year PhD candidate at Yale University in New Haven, CT. I research the stability and biophysics of DNA so that we have more accurate ways to study this ubiquitous part of life. My work is funded by the National Institutes of Health. I am writing to strongly urge the OMB to reconsider this series of rule changes. In particular, §200.205, which gives political appointees the discretion to award or deny research grants and limits the authority of the peer-review process, would be a disaster for science advancement in the United States. Political appointees do not have the specialized knowledge to understand how research can advance national interests. Much science research, including what I work on, has benefits to those across fields but that is most clear to the researchers who could or would use it in the future. A political appointee without background might dismiss research as not directly related to dancing the President's policy priorities but in fact the research lays the groundwork for understanding disease, building tools, and advancing human health. This rule change should be rejected in its entirety.BrahmmiConnecticut