The White House Office of Management and Budget has proposed a rule to overhaul federal grantmaking across agencies, sparking concern across higher education and beyond. The plans have attracted roughly 99,000 public comments to date, with the window to respond ending on July 13.
The proposal would shift grantmaking from an advisory peer review board to political appointees, which sector leaders have called concerning.
President of the American Association of Colleges and Universities, Lynn Pasquerella, said the United States has led the world in research because experts in the relevant fields have evaluated proposals for their quality, originality, and potential impact.
Pasquerella added that when the government substitutes political or ideological judgments for independent scientific review, it risks distorting research priorities, discouraging innovative work, and undermining confidence in the integrity of the federal research enterprise.
If passed, the rule would allow agencies to cancel any grant at any time if they are deemed inconsistent with evolving national interests, which could result in a waste of taxpayer money and create uncertainty for researchers.
Related: US students keep studying abroad
Lynn Pasquerella said the rule risked treating international scientific collaboration as a liability rather than as one of America’s greatest strengths.
She warned that additional barriers for international researchers may undermine those strengths without improving national security.
According to Lynn Pasquerella, the conversation should not be framed as a choice between national security and scientific excellence, because the US can do both.
The proposal to change the current guidance governing federal financial assistance into regulatory policy would have negative consequences, according to the American Council on Education, which has said it would establish a precedent that would last far beyond the administration.
In its comment letter to OMB director Russel Vought, the American Council on Education said the government’s partnership with higher education had been built upon long-term financial investments and merit-based decision making, paired with a clear respect for institutional autonomy and freedom of inquiry.
Related: Games for Change Launches 2026 Youth Game Challenge
The American Council on Education argues that the new rule would dramatically weaken the foundation of this partnership and stifle scientific progress, as well as transforming legal requirements into instruments for partisan purposes.
Experts have raised concerns about the excessive administrative burden associated with the planned rule, greatly increasing regulatory red tape for scientists and institutions receiving federal grants.
Beyond the sector, the rule would apply to states, localities, and other federally funded non-profit organisations working on public services from health to transport, and education to farming, with the sum of federal grants across agencies totalling approximately $1.1 trillion.
Research collaborations between US institutions and international partners have already come under scrutiny, with several leading colleges winding down partnerships in China.
Lynn Pasquerella highlighted that America’s world-leading position in science rests on its culture of academic freedom and its investment in research, and if the US becomes less attractive to top researchers, competing nations will benefit from talent and discoveries.
Leave a Reply