A Trump administration effort to give political figures control over a large swath of U.S. science funding is off the table until at least December.
On Tuesday members of the House of Representatives voted 370-48, with 14 members not voting, to adopt a Senate appropriations bill that will continue funding federal agencies until December 11.
In August, as part of the stopgap measure, the Senate agreed not to adopt proposed rule changes from the Office of Budget Management that would give politically appointed bureaucrats authority over federal research grants. If implemented, these changes would break from the current system, in which independent panels of peer reviewers, experts in the field, assess grant requests for funding from the National Institutes of Health, the National Science Foundation and other governmental agencies.
On supporting science journalism
If you’re enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.
The proposed rule changes have met an outpouring of opposition from the scientific community. Thousands of researchers, including several Nobel laureates, used the public comment period on the proposal to say it would politicize research and destroy U.S. leadership in global science.
The question of whether the proposed rule changes will go further could hinge largely on the outcome of the midterm elections, which will be held in November: Democrats, who are currently favored to win control of the House, have broadly opposed the changes.
It’s Time to Stand Up for Science
If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.
SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.
If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.
In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can’t-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world’s best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.
There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.
