Comment from Austin Ramsey

,As a researcher in the united states at a top university, Johns Hopkins, I am writing to oppose the rule change on Docket OMB-2026-0034. I strongly oppose having non-experts decide on the circulation of money throughout the sciences. There is no reasonable cause for a non-expert to control work that is deemed scientifically meritorious by a grant review panel. I specifically oppose Section 200.340-42 because it is not a surefire way to achieve the goal you have set forth. Simply flagging for DEI terms yields too many false-positives. There should be no instance of money granted to a researcher should be canceled for any reason other than misconduct. I oppose Section 200.206 because it is worded in too broad of a manner, and could be applied to a toddler with the way it is written. Due to the broad nature of the article, it becomes unenforceable. I oppose Section 200.461 on patriotic terms. New indexes are already showing that China is outcompeting the US when it comes to publications in top tier journals. To introduce another roadblock surely means the death of science in the united states. I understand frugality, but this research must be distributed as a function of the grants that fund them. I oppose Section 200.450 because it is written as too broad of a classification and can be twisted around to satisfy the will of those in power, while serving no protections towards the people and their science. I vehemently oppose Section 200.202(e) because it will deter collaborations. To be current and competitive one must be able to collaborate broadly. This is why I oppose these rule changes. Austin M. Ramsey, PhD, Johns Hopkins UniversityAustin [ ]