White House Proposes Overhaul of US Science Funding and Peer Review

Proposed Changes to Grant Oversight

The White House's Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has proposed a rule change that would significantly alter how the United States manages and distributes federal science funding. The proposal seeks to shift control over grant approvals away from traditional scientific merit systems toward increased political oversight.

According to Andy McCammon, a chemistry research professor at the University of California at San Diego and member of the National Academy of Sciences editorial board, the proposed legislation would bypass the peer-review process for scientific grant proposals in favor of political oversight. McCammon further stated that the proposal would allow grants to be terminated "at any time, for any reason".

Administration Justification

The rule change was proposed by the OMB under the leadership of Director Russell Vought. Administration officials have defended the move as a measure intended to increase efficiency within the federal government.

In an official statement, a spokesperson for the OMB asserted that the changes would "improve the ability of agencies to identify and respond to waste, fraud, and abuse",.

Scientific Community Reaction

The proposal has met with significant opposition from professional scientific organizations and academic researchers. The Infectious Diseases Society of America issued a statement claiming that the proposed rule would "replace scientific merit with McCarthy era politics",.

Professor Andy McCammon described the potential changes as "another devastating blow to American science". He specifically highlighted concerns that the proposal would largely prevent federal funds from being used for international collaboration, attending professional meetings, or publishing research.

Critics of the plan argue that there is no evidence to suggest that the current peer-review system requires such sweeping modifications,.