Comment on CFTC-2026-1157, CFTC-2026-1157-0001, Anon, Anon

I am writing in my personal capacity to voice my strong opposition to this proposed rule, as it would cause significant harm to the American public at large as well as the scientific community’s ability to advance knowledge and the public good. I am especially concerned by the following sections of the rule: Section 200.205: This section weakens peer review, the most important part of the scientific process, by making it advisory and shifting decision-making to political appointees. This threatens objective science and is unprecedented political interference into scientific funding. Sections 200.340 and 200.341: These sections allow grants to be terminated at will and whim, and create instability for long-term scientific projects. Science takes time, and introducing risk into the process of funded scientific studies will prevent institutions from investing in large-scale research. This also creates a number of perverse incentives that undermine objective scientific processes – including introducing incentives to skew results and manipulating research agendas to match political will. These sections introduce the threat of arbitrary cancellations - discouraging high-risk, high-reward research, and incentivize scientists to conduct research outside of the US – hemorrhaging scientific talent and reducing U.S. competitiveness in a global research environment where other countries offer more predictable funding streams. Sections 200.432, 200.454, and 200.461: The proposed rule restricts international collaboration, which harms the US as much or more than the international community. International collaboration takes place through conferences, professional societies, and publishing - all of which have administrative costs. Making these costs “unallowable” forces scientists into a vacuum where we can not accelerate science, learn from others, and collaborate with international leaders. Science will not thrive in isolation and alienation. Furthermore this creates layers of administrative costs that are completely unnecessary and increases the net price the government will pay for science. These proposed changes threaten to politicize the scientific process from within, as well as isolate and handcuff US scientists. The effect will be to encourage scientists to leave to conduct their cutting-edge research elsewhere. Scientific advances that keep Americans safe will suffer – restricting advances in medical care, food safety, environmental safety, and other issues that affect all Americans makes no sense and I hope that OMB will reconsider these rule changes.