NSF redirects $1.5B to private tech initiative as basic science budgets shrink
The proposed rule, published by the Office of Management and Budget, outlines dozens of changes to the Code of Federal Regulations governing grants and federal financial assistance, according to an analysis published Saturday by Daniel Malinsky, an assistant professor of biostatistics at Columbia University’s Mailman School of Public Health. Malinsky wrote in The Guardian that the changes would codify oversight of award decisions by political appointees and require grants to be evaluated on whether they “demonstrably advance the president’s policy priorities.”
The rule would also prohibit use of funds “to support a bilateral or multilateral collaboration, agreement, program, or activity with a covered foreign country or covered foreign entity,” Malinsky noted. Depending on interpretation, the provision could create formidable obstacles to collaborations between U.S. and Chinese scientists on cancer, environmental health, and new technologies, he wrote.
The American Astronomical Society stated in a response that “the proposed rule, if passed in its current form, would enact policies that would cause significant harm to the scientific community, research institutions, and professional societies.” The society urged scientists and the public to submit comments opposing the rule by the July 14 deadline.
Malinsky drew parallels between the OMB rule and prior moves affecting research funding. The National Institutes of Health has experienced grant freezes and administrative disarray, while political appointees have been tasked with reviewing projects for keywords including “disparity” and “marginalized,” he wrote. Proposed restrictions would also make international collaboration difficult or impossible.
Separately, the National Science Foundation is cutting budgets for basic science research and redirecting money to a new $1.5 billion initiative called “X-Labs,” which aims to support product and technology development by looking “outside of traditional institutions,” Malinsky wrote, citing a Science magazine report. He noted that a previous iteration of the initiative was called “Tech Labs,” and the language pointed toward private company involvement and a move away from universities and basic science research organizations.
Malinsky wrote that redirecting research resources to private tech companies, which are motivated by profit rather than advancing knowledge or public health, would lead to research “divorced from the public good and not democratically accountable.” He compared the strategy to disinvesting from public transportation infrastructure and boosting private companies, leaving citizens with worse service and higher costs.
The comment period on the OMB proposed rule closes July 14. The American Astronomical Society has encouraged scientists and members of the public to submit comments expressing opposition.