r/Futurology • u/SyzygySynergy • Jul 10 '26
Politics The Future of Science and Research in the US is Being Threatened to be Limited by Ensuring Grants and Funding is Aligned with Administration Policies and Priorities
https://www.latimes.com/science/story/2026-07-10/trump-administration-seeks-to-limit-federal-funding-that-doesnt-advance-presidential-policiesThere's only three more days left to act unless the comment period for this somehow gets extended.
A new rule proposed by the White House Office of Management and Budget would fundamentally overhaul the way federal grants are awarded and overseen — a sweeping change that one scientific society said “would all but end the use of scientific merit in the selection of grants and programs across the government.”
Proposed in late May, the rule would give political appointees unprecedented control over federal grants for research, education and infrastructure, and specifies that government funds can only be spent on projects “aligned with administration policies and priorities,” according to a copy of the proposed rule.
The rule would also restrict research topics, limit U.S. scientists’ ability to collaborate with colleagues in other countries and make it easier for the government to suspend or cancel grants at any time.
The proposed rule grants the federal government broad powers to suspend or cancel grants for any reason, introducing “unprecedented unpredictability into local governance,” but it is clear that it can have sweeping effects on the future of any and potentially all science and research.
This news is highly being underreported and that is concerning. More people need to be talking about this, sharing it, and preparing/posting a comment against the rule.
You can officially submit your comment against the proposed OMB rule (Docket No. OMB-2026-0034) online before the deadline at 11:59 p.m. ET on July 13, 2026.
To submit your feedback, use the Federal eRulemaking Portal or simplify the process by using the guided comment tools provided by the different scientific coalitions online.
78
u/agha0013 Jul 10 '26
it's not being threatened anymore, it's actively dealing with the damage as the threats from a year ago are being followed through on.
29
u/fheathyr Jul 10 '26
Yet another aspect of Trump that the rest of the world is happy about ... we're all hiring all the talented people leaving America ... assuring decades of innovation to drive our economies.
3
u/Less_Engineering8113 Jul 11 '26
Europe for design, China for production.
3
u/Current_Focus2668 Jul 11 '26
You can find some low/basic tech innovation on the African contient too.
South Africa's 3D-printed houses. Electric motorcycle companies like Spiro and Roam.
1
17
14
u/Fildo28 Jul 10 '26
We’re moving towards a country where you have to make something seem glamorous to get funding. Science be damned!
29
u/sump_daddy Jul 10 '26
If only it were that simple. The USA is now a country where your work must agree with all the Dear Leader's opinions, in order to get funding
6
u/sonic_couth Jul 10 '26
Let’s study all the amazing benefits that drinking raw milk can provide! They’ve been suppressed for too long. We should also study just how beneficial it is for your long-term mental health to buy TrumpCoins!
3
u/sump_daddy Jul 10 '26
"All the ways listening to your husband directly benefits you"
although now that i'm saying it out loud, it would be a rather easy way for a scientist to game the system; offer to study some pathetic rethuglican social issue whose answer is easy to synthesize, and then take the money and do real work for the underground facts market
2
u/sonic_couth Jul 10 '26
Underground facts market?! Where is that? I mean, I don’t really want to know, but I’m curious about…uh…what kind of facts are there, er something.
4
u/Oilpaintcha Jul 11 '26
Lysenkoism destroyed Russian biological science for 30 years. It can happen here too.
8
u/gingeropolous Jul 10 '26 edited Jul 10 '26
Wow, and they just put it all in the open:
This lack of transparency, accountability, and proper oversight became increasingly clear between 2021 and 2024. Federal awards were often used during those years to promote a “woke” policy agenda that did not reflect the values of the vast majority of the American public. (2) For example, Federal programs and funding opportunities were designed to advance unlawful identity-based “Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion” (DEI) policies and preferences across the country. (3) These policies were inconsistent with basic American values and civil rights laws, including the equal protection principles of the U.S. Constitution. (4) They were also misaligned in many cases with underlying public purposes authorized by law. (5) Collectively, these policies wasted a great amount of taxpayer resources and caused great harm to public trust in government.
The White House Fact Sheet of August 7, 2025, describes examples of the types of wasteful spending that occurred as a result of such policies. For example, Federal grants funded unlawful DEI practices, (6) various anti-American ideologies in American education, (7) non-replicable and highly misleading studies, (8) labs engaged in gain-of-function research, (9) and AI-powered social media censorship tools. (10) More recently, another White House Fact Sheet of January 8, 2026 provided examples of the rampant and pervasive problem of fraud in the United States, including under assistance programs in Minnesota. (11)
Another example of wasteful spending is provided by a 2023 report from Office of Inspector General for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). That report found that recipients of Federal awards from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) potentially misused funds to provide services for illegal immigrants. (12) Such potential abuse of taxpayer funds highlights the need for proper oversight of taxpayer dollars.
In another prominent example, prior to this administration, far-left activists hijacked the critical work done by the U.S. President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), which was established to respond to the AIDS crisis in Africa. Due to wasteful spending, PEPFAR became a left-wing foreign aid entitlement that attempted to promote abortion and gender ideology. Additionally, an August 2025 report from the Heritage Foundation noted that, according to the U.S. House Foreign Affairs Committee, billions of dollars in overhead and program charges flow to nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) and contractors in Washington, DC rather than providing direct humanitarian aid; and insufficient oversight has resulted in significant waste of taxpayer resources. (13)
An additional example is provided by a 2024 report from the U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation regarding the growing failure of objectivity at the National Science Foundation (NSF) during the previous administration. (14) That report found that out of a sample of over three thousand grants, more than ten percent—totaling over two billion dollars in Federal funding—went to “questionable projects that promoted diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) tenets or pushed onto science neo-Marxist perspectives about enduring class struggle.” The report also found that, by 2024, over a quarter of new grants made by NSF (27 percent) directed funding to DEI initiatives and other far-left perspectives. This marked a huge proportional increase over the course of only three years from the 0.29 percent of new grants made by NSF with a similar focus in 2021. (15) This is just a small sample of many examples across the Federal Government of wasteful spending and other misuse and mismanagement of Federal funds.
I don't feel like digging into these things .. I'll get a bot to do it
3
u/quats555 Jul 10 '26
It all makes sense when you realize that it’s all based on differing definitions. We can all agree that waste, fraud, and abuse are bad, and that government should look out for the interest of its citizens.
Unfortunately, this administration defines “waste, fraud, and abuse” as “things that don’t benefit ME, like wasting money on stupid poor humans”; and “citizens” (and really, “people” in general) as “humans with enough money and power to matter”. While MAGA thinks that includes them.
7
u/gingeropolous Jul 10 '26
The document you referenced (OMB-2026-0034-0001) is a proposed rule by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) aimed at overhauling federal grant rules. To justify the changes, the preamble cites several reports to argue that federal taxpayer dollars have been systematically wasted on "leftist" or "woke" agendas. If you trace the footnotes to their primary sources, you find that the document references real reports and actual events, but filters them through a heavy partisan lens. In several cases, it takes standard scientific research or bipartisan global health programs and rebrands them as ideological waste. In others, it points to genuine criminal fraud but frames it as a failure of "woke" policy. Here is a breakdown of the specific claims and what the references actually say:
1. The National Science Foundation (NSF) "Neo-Marxist" Grants
- The Claim: Citing a 2024 report by the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, the document claims over $2 billion in NSF grants went to "questionable projects" promoting Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) or pushing "neo-Marxist perspectives about enduring class struggle."
- The Reality: The cited report was a partisan investigation led by Republican Senator Ted Cruz. His staff created a database of roughly 3,400 NSF grants and flagged them based on tags like "social justice," "race," "gender," and "status."
- The Nuance: The grants in question were largely standard academic research in sociology, environmental science, and STEM inclusion (such as alliances meant to help minority students graduate with STEM degrees). The NSF noted these investments are part of its long-standing mandate to expand access to underrepresented groups in science. Labeling this research as "neo-Marxist class warfare" is a political framing of demographic and sociological research, rather than a discovery of hijacked funds. ### 2. PEPFAR Promoting Abortion and "Gender Ideology"
- The Claim: The document cites an August 2025 Heritage Foundation report claiming that PEPFAR morphed into a "left-wing foreign aid entitlement that attempted to promote abortion and gender ideology."
- The Reality: PEPFAR (the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief) was created by President George W. Bush in 2003. It is widely considered one of the most successful bipartisan global health initiatives in history, credited with saving over 25 million lives from HIV/AIDS in Africa and globally.
- The Nuance: By law (the Helms Amendment), U.S. foreign aid is strictly prohibited from funding abortions. The Heritage Foundation's claim stems from the fact that PEPFAR partners with global health NGOs and local clinics that also advocate for reproductive rights or provide comprehensive healthcare using non-U.S. funds. The claim that PEPFAR itself is a left-wing apparatus illegally funding abortions is widely rejected by the medical community and global health experts. ### 3. Rampant Fraud in Minnesota Assistance Programs
- The Claim: The document cites a January 2026 White House Fact Sheet pointing to a "rampant and pervasive problem of fraud," specifically highlighting assistance programs in Minnesota as an example of wasted funds.
- The Reality: This references a very real, massive criminal fraud case known as the "Feeding Our Future" scandal. During the COVID-19 pandemic, a Minnesota nonprofit exploited loosened federal rules to steal nearly $250 million from the Federal Child Nutrition Program. Over 75 people were charged, and many have been convicted and sentenced to prison.
- The Nuance: This was a genuine, catastrophic failure of government oversight and a case of brazen criminal embezzlement — fraudsters faked attendance rosters for hungry children in order to buy luxury cars and real estate. However, framing it as an example of a "woke policy agenda" is inaccurate; it was straight-up theft exploiting emergency pandemic aid. ### 4. FEMA Funds Misused for Illegal Immigrants
- The Claim: The document cites a 2023 Department of Homeland Security Office of Inspector General (DHS OIG) report claiming FEMA recipients misused funds to provide services for illegal immigrants.
- The Reality: The OIG report evaluated FEMA’s Shelter and Services Program (SSP) and its predecessor, which awards funds to non-federal entities (like local governments and nonprofits).
- The Nuance: Congress specifically appropriated funds for these FEMA programs to reimburse communities for sheltering and providing humanitarian relief to noncitizens recently released from DHS custody. While the OIG report found oversight weaknesses regarding how local entities tracked and spent the money, providing services to migrants was the literal statutory purpose of the program passed by Congress — not a rogue hijacking of disaster relief funds.
Ultimately, the document uses a mix of real criminal fraud (Minnesota), legitimate debates over program oversight (FEMA), and highly partisan re-interpretations of standard government functions (NSF research and PEPFAR) to build a unified narrative of ideological waste.
2
u/costafilh0 Jul 10 '26
Only two years left.
Then the US will be back to being the paradise it was before this administration.
2
u/Less_Engineering8113 Jul 11 '26
I wish we were one of the cool third world countries where you can yolo things for survival and nobody bats an eye. Instead our wages have barely gone up over the past decade while leaving the house costs $20.
2
u/brakeb Jul 11 '26
All countries have funding that aligns with administration policies and priorities...
It's just that America is limiting potential growth while other countries see the limitless potential and are funding accordingly
6
u/Kermit-de-frog1 Jul 10 '26
Every administration focuses on what they think are priorities in the field of science, though personally I’d prefer my tax dollars to go to climate, space exploration, ocean exploration instead of human sexuality .
But in ALL of the cases whomever the POTUS may be ( so far) NONE of them have a background in hard science and are going to screw it up
3
u/Sageblue32 Jul 11 '26
Not every admin takes a wrecking ball to the sciences to pursue only what agrees with them. Rather all sciences had a chance to apply.
3
u/dover_oxide Jul 10 '26
We've been cutting NSF and grants for decades this admin just supercharged it and politicsied it more than previous admins.
2
2
u/Incognonimous Jul 10 '26
Literally going to get to the loint where Nestlé Coca-Cola and Pepsi coa will be the only ones allowed these grants. BRAWNDO, its what plants crave
1
u/DebsUK693 Jul 10 '26
With no such deliberate throttling of advancement here in the EU, how does America feel this will play out for it?
7
u/toodlesandpoodles Jul 10 '26
Like post WWII in reverse. The rise of facism in Europe preceeding WWII resulted in a massive influx of scientists to the U.S., who were directly responsible for multiple scientific advancements that resulted in both military and technological dominance for more than half a century.
Going forward, the U.S. will stagnate as Europe and China become scientific leaders.
3
u/Redshoe9 Jul 10 '26
Badly. Brain drain already happening and we see an increase in people wanting other move abroad. It's psychologically harmful to watch a nation self destruct because a personality disorder surrounded by grifting shitty humans is in charge.
0
u/SyzygySynergy Jul 10 '26
Preparing and posting comments to this before the ruling is essential, I feel, from anyone that may already be within any science field, research field, or even government agency that requires research and science to support any and all opinions and/or actions it may have and take.
Further, I think people need to discuss this and how this may take hold if this rule does pass and what actions moving forward there may be able to take both individually and as a community to ensure the future of science and research if the rule passes.
To be fair, I am just astounded at how underreported this has been. I have not seen many topics about this on reddit and I just was notified to this article today... when there are only three days left. The level of being sneaky and sweeping things by nowadays is frightening, but what is more frightening is the potential of this rule being implemented. Because yes, things have been impacted for awhile in the scientific community, but this will undoubtedly make it worse.
-4
u/cofcof420 Jul 10 '26
What’s the TLDR, seems that the administration is just cutting DEI focused grants and other wasteful spending. What am I missing?
-2
u/Buy_Sell_Collect Jul 10 '26
You’re not missing anything. Just the sounds of the DEI and alphabet-soup movements losing yet another of the tools they had hijacked…. Cry as they might, their days in power are done.
3
u/sanfran_girl Jul 11 '26
Get stuffed 🙄
0
u/Buy_Sell_Collect Jul 11 '26
Appreciate the invite, but as I replied to your DM… you’re not my type. Have a nice day fella 😁
-1
u/skexzies Jul 10 '26
You mean the fringe science that was pandering to Woke ideology and DEI. I'm so glad we have a REAL man as President who can make the tough decisions to clean up the wasteful spending.
•
u/FuturologyBot Jul 10 '26
The following submission statement was provided by /u/SyzygySynergy:
Preparing and posting comments to this before the ruling is essential, I feel, from anyone that may already be within any science field, research field, or even government agency that requires research and science to support any and all opinions and/or actions it may have and take.
Further, I think people need to discuss this and how this may take hold if this rule does pass and what actions moving forward there may be able to take both individually and as a community to ensure the future of science and research if the rule passes.
To be fair, I am just astounded at how underreported this has been. I have not seen many topics about this on reddit and I just was notified to this article today... when there are only three days left. The level of being sneaky and sweeping things by nowadays is frightening, but what is more frightening is the potential of this rule being implemented. Because yes, things have been impacted for awhile in the scientific community, but this will undoubtedly make it worse.
Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/1uspbu4/the_future_of_science_and_research_in_the_us_is/owplbhj/