Comment from Anonymous

Anonymous AnonymousOpposeAcademic
Summary: A professor at Duke University and Navy veteran opposes the proposed rule, arguing that it introduces political oversight into the scientific grant process. The commenter contends that scientific progress relies on independent scientific judgment rather than political control, citing the success of the current NSF model.
I am a U.S. Navy Vietnam veteran of the nuclear submarine service and a professor in physics and biology at Duke University. As a nuclear power-plant operator in the Navy, I marveled at the discoveries in science and engineering that produced the world’s first nuclear submarine. Later, as an undergraduate, graduate student, and a professor, my education gave me understanding of just how important science is for society to function at every level. I will focus on §200.205, and §200.202, which engage a political appointee to review grants, and note that the “architect of modern U.S. science policy” Vannevar Bush, American engineer, inventor, and science administrator, established the vision that created the NSF and its underlying principles, which grant funds to universities based on the scientific judgement of scientists. Under that model, the US has led the way in countless discoveries (developing computers; our basic scientists played a foundational role in developing AI, the ‘green revolution’ in agriculture, triumphs in medical developments, etc.) By contrast under the Soviet (and now Russian) system, research operates under both scientific officers and political officers, the political officers assuring that technical developments do not deviate from the wishes of the political leadership. In beating the Soviets to moon, our Apollo space program may have served as turning point in demonstrating that their economic system could not compete with ours and collapsed. There are many ways to measure a nation’s scientific achievements, but to cite just one: comparing the number of Nobel prizes in physiology or medicine, chemistry, and physics won by citizens of the U.S., Russian, and China since 2000: for Russia, there have been 5, all in Physics, two of whom had dual citizenship and a third had moved to the U.S. at the time of the award; in China, just one (in Physiology/Medicine); in the U.S.: well over 100. For the consequences of political control over science, read ‘Miidnight at Chernobyl” Students from around the world seek their education and training in the U.S. I urge that the proposed rule be rejected

View on Regulations.gov