Comment on FR Doc # 2026-12725 from Sebastian Esparza
AnonymousOpposeIndividual
Summary: The commenter opposes the proposal, arguing that it could lead to the politicization of science and undermine independent research and international collaboration. They express concern that the guidance could allow political appointees to influence funding decisions, potentially violating constitutional rights.
The NSF basically funds Scientific Research & engineering nationwide. It funds Science such as Environmental Science, Social Sciences, Biotechnology & Mathematics.... It funds scientific research in all 50 states & that is made possible by a system called PEER REVIEW, yes you heard that right..PEER REVIEW! Peer Review is what made American Science gold standard, such as people who have knowledge in these fields telling us which type of science is best funded. However, I have concerns that this proposal aligns with Russ Vought' proposal to Politicize Science, such as giving Political appointees the final say on which science is funded. However, since 2025, President Trump has ironically undermined Scientific Research, such as wanting the National Center for Atmospheric Research to be dismantled (since it provides atmospheric models), Wanted the AMOC systems to be dismantled & the most concerning part about this is that trump fired the entire 22 members of the national science board. I urge you to reject this proposal since this could basically undermine American scientific research (escpailly for those who are in university or are pursuing higher education). The OMB proposal could also affect those who rely on International collaboration, wanted to do civic duty as well as wanting to have free thinking & independent thought, this may violate the bill of rights, the 1st amendment & the HATCH act.....I urge you to reject this proposal.