U.S. Rep. Rosa DeLauro: “This is an effort to take control over federal grant-making and use it as leverage to enforce compliance with the political dictates of the Trump administration.” Prof. Steven Girvin: When the U.S. created a peer review process for awarding grants, it created a resea rch apparatus that was “the envy of the world.” Dr. Esen Sefik moved from Istanbul to New Haven 20 years ago because she believed the U.S. was the best place to do scientific research. Now, her advisees are wondering whether to stay in their home countries instead. Sefik described the U.S.’s changing research climate on Monday during a press conference hosted by U.S. Rep. Rosa DeLauro. A half-dozen scientists, professors, and nonprofit advocates gathered at 101 College St. to criticize a proposed rule by the Trump administration that would require a political appointee to approve all discretionary federal grants. The proposed rule, issued by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), would affect over $200 billion in federal spending. “This is an effort to take control over federal grant-making and use it as leverage to enforce compliance with the political dictates of the Trump administration,” said DeLauro. Until now, the government’s competitive grant process has been guided by peer review. But in a 412-page memo for the rule, peer review recommendations are described as “advisory,” not “routinely deferred to.” For Sefik, an immunology professor at Yale School of Medicine, the change undermines the meritocracy of the U.S.’s research apparatus. “Like many scientists, I’ve made enormous personal and professional sacrifices to be here. But I believed that great ideas, rigorous science, and hard work would be recognized through a fair and merit-based system,” she said. “Today, that confidence has been shaken.” Another provision of the rule requires political appointees to deny applications that “promote anti-American values,” question “the sex binary in humans,” or use race as a “selection criterion” for program participation. The Trump administration is “already determining what questions we feel safe asking,” said Alex Rich, a neuroscience PhD student at Yale. Rich studies binge-eating disorders, which are more common in women. Understanding the reason for that disparity could improve patient outcomes, she said, but many research proposals have been rejected for studying gender-based differences in health. “I’ve seen [this environment] push my peers to avoid entire areas of necessary study, discouraging work that actually reflects our community’s needs,” she said. The new rule would also enable agencies to cancel active grants for any reason, creating tremendous uncertainty for young scientists like Rich. “For my generation, it raises a really difficult question: whether this is still a system we can trust to build a future.” The proposed rule has received almost 70,000 comments from advocates across the country. The comment period ends in two weeks. If the rule is codified, then it will go into effect on Oct. 1, 2026. DeLauro, the ranking Democrat on the House Appropriations Committee, said she has tried to block the rule, but her amendments have thus far been defeated by Republicans. On Tuesday, she plans to attend a hearing with the OMB head and focus on the rule. Jenny Strauss, an officer with Yale Ventures, spoke at Monday’s press conference as a cancer survivor. “In my story, hope was a clinical trial of an experimental, promising combination of treatments for a cancer diagnosis that didn’t have any other options,” she said. Under the proposed rule, that study would have required approval from an unelected political appointee. But because Strauss’s form of cancer is most common among Ashkenazi Jewish women, the protocol for selecting patients may have not been approved. The proposed changes “would make stories like mine turn out quite differently,” said Strauss. “I am really grateful for the opportunity to be here on behalf of Americans who are indebted to publicly-supported research.” Prof. John Krystal: Already, there is “chaos and terror among our faculty.” The post Scientists Slam Trump Rule Change appeared first on New Haven Independent. ...read more read less