Trump administration proposes federal grant overhaul targeting scientific research
By
Kevin Bogardus
Crisp on the outside, thoughtful on the inside. A keeper.
Summary
The Trump administration, through the Office of Management and Budget, has proposed revising federal grantmaking regulations that would require dozens of agencies to overhaul how they distribute billions of dollars in grants. This effort is part of a broader campaign by President Trump to exert political control over the federal scientific enterprise, and it has already begun causing concern within the scientific community.
Key quotes
· 3 pulledThe Trump administration's effort to shake up federal grantmaking has begun sending shock waves through the scientific community.
The Office of Management and Budget has proposed revising regulations overseeing government assistance, according to a Federal Register notice published Friday.
The OMB effort is part of President Donald Trump's larger campaign to exert political control over the federal scientific enterprise.
You might also wanna read
Trump Administration Places Federal Grant Funding Under Political Control
The Trump administration has issued an executive order placing all federal grant funding, including research grants, under political control
arstechnica.com·9mo ago
White House proposes giving political appointees final authority over federal research grants
The White House has proposed new Office of Management and Budget regulations that would give political appointees final approval authority o
scientificamerican.com·1d ago
US Supreme Court Allows Trump Administration to Cut $2 Billion in NIH Research Grants
The US Supreme Court has ruled in favor of the Trump administration, allowing it to proceed with cutting nearly $2 billion in active researc
nature.com·9mo ago
NIH Policy Shift Reduces Number of Science Grants While Increasing Individual Award Amounts
The article reveals a significant but quiet policy shift at the National Institutes of Health (NIH) where the agency has been making fewer b
nytimes.com·5mo ago