The integrity of science in the United States is at stake and we need your help. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) “Regulation for Federal Financial Assistance” presents severe challenges to the scientific enterprise because it exposes all federal research funding to political interference. If the law is amended, these changes will affect your ability to select and attend research projects and conferences, collaborate with international researchers from certain countries, pay publication fees, and more.
GSA is committed to continuing research funding and advocating for scientific integrity and supporting our genetics community.
What can I do to help?
We are asking members of our genetics and genomics community to submit public comment on the recently proposed regulations.July 13, 2026. Please do not wait until the deadline as the servers may crash and OMB has said they will. No Extend the deadline. All comments must be submitted. Directly via https://www.regulations.gov/document/OMB-2026-0034-0001.
How will the proposed revision affect me?
These proposed revisions will:
- Give final approval on federal research grants to political appointees rather than committees of non-political experts at agencies such as the NSF and NIH. Ensuring compliance with presidential policy priorities. Scientific peer review of research proposals “shall remain advisory and shall not replace agency discretion.”
- Prohibit mention of gender/gender differences in grants.Making it difficult for scientists doing evolutionary and population genetics, sex genetics, developmental biology, and biological research to articulate their work. This change will also pose challenges for scientists studying genetics in model organisms. Drosophila, C. elegans, zebrafish, and mice, among others, because this research often touches on sex-specific biological differences to explain basic genetic and evolutionary processes.
- Impose restrictions on foreign cooperation.Prohibiting the use of federal funds for partnerships with certain foreign countries or entities (unspecified).
- Eliminate payment and reimbursement for publication, conference attendance, and membership costs.unless prior federal approval is granted in select cases.
These regulations, if enacted, would go far beyond this current administration. Long-term effects And affects the entire federal government, all agencies, and everyone who works on federal funding.
Why should I submit a comment? Is GSA not collecting one?
Yes, GSA will submit as a society. However, to make the right impact, the government should receive as many individual comments as possible. It’s common for suggestions of this magnitude to get comment numbers in the millions or tens of millions. This is why we encourage you to submit a comment independently of comments from GSA or other organizations. Don’t assume that your voice will only be heard through GSA’s letter, as grouped comments or sign-on letters will be counted as only one comment by OMB.
How do I write an effective comment?
A former NIH program officer has written an excellent guide on how to effectively write and submit a comment that can have the right impact. Highlights of this guide include:
- Enter the specific section number (e.g., §200.205) of the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) in brackets and, if addressing more than one section, enter each section number at the beginning of each separate paragraph.
- Explain who you are and why you can provide this perspective (eg, a federally funded scientist, a scientific society).
- Explain how the proposed language in the section will specifically affect you and your research. You’ve likely felt these effects for the past 15+ months, which is another reason why submitting public comments is so important, as this rule will codify these earlier changes previously proposed by executive order.
- Give clear examples that demonstrate your lab, graduate students, and the ability to continue the research.
- Chart the waste of already spent research funds if grants are suddenly terminated
- A description of what happens if you can’t use federal grant funds to publish your NIH- or NSF-funded research or present it at scientific conferences.
- Share the impact of failure to collaborate with researchers outside the US on both your lab and scientific institution.
- While emotional appeals are helpful for advocacy with elected representatives, in this case, regulatory reviewers will look for objective, straightforward evidence. Avoid using statements that lack evidence or hyperbolic language
- OMB cited three goals with these changes: increasing transparency, clarifying regulatory status, and reducing the burden on award recipients. Refer back to these goals and state. how Many of these proposed changes would actually reduce transparency and increase the burden on awardees.
- Do not copy/paste comments from form letters, sign-on letters, or public petitions. Comments written in your own words, sharing your own experiences, carry more legal weight and are required to be responded to by OMB.
- Avoid using large language model AI tools to generate your commentary. If you use tools like ChatGPT or Claude to organize your ideas, use them with caution. Fact-check and read the proposed text carefully to adjust any incorrect information and ensure that your experiences are presented accurately and that the final product does not read as generic, heavy automated text.
- While the comment box limits you to 5,000 characters (including spaces), you can upload a file with additional text.
- be specific and factual; Where possible, provide quantitative impact data.
Why does my comment matter? Isn’t this a waste of time and effort?
It is vitally important that we continue to advocate for the preservation of science. The Administrative Procedure Act requires OMB by statute to read and respond to every substantive comment submitted through the regular rulemaking process before finalizing the rule. Your comment will become part of the permanent public record, preventing OMB and the administration from arguing that there was no public objection. Additionally, a record of comments forms the basis for future legal and legislative action. When reviewing cases, courts can look to whether OMB responded adequately to public opposition, and a strong record of opposition strengthens any legal challenge to a proposed revision. Finally, see Congress Commentary Vol. Seeing thousands of detailed comments indicates that a rule is politically controversial, possibly warranting legislation.
Additionally, with the midterms coming up—elected members of Congress, of any party, are expected to keep their jobs. So, after a thorough comment, keep calling your senators and representatives and urging them to openly oppose these regulations.
Can I post a comment anonymously?
Yes If you wish to remain anonymous, make sure you indicate that you are submitting as an “anonymous” entity and do not enter your name or organization in the fields provided, which are optional. OMB gives more weight to comments from individuals or organizations who identify themselves, but by law, they must consider all comments they receive, including anonymous ones. As mentioned above, Congress takes into account the volume of comments and that can make a difference in whether and when the issue comes up in the courts, so it is important that scientists show up in large numbers. Please note that everything included in your form when you submit your comment will be posted publicly on regulations.gov.
Can I use my professional or corporate email address?
Make sure you get guidance from your employer. Some institutions may object to using your institution’s address for commenting.
Can I submit multiple comments?
Yes, you can submit multiple comments and the more comments recorded, the better; However, make sure that each of your comments addresses the different sections in a significant way. Do not repost others’ comments or post the same comment multiple times because OMB will not count them.
I am not a US citizen or live in the US Can I comment?
Yes, OMB should consider these comments as well. We encourage you to discuss how these regulations affect international cooperation and the standing of the American scientific community on the world stage. Furthermore, it is important to explain how the proposed restrictions on international cooperation will affect scientific research and how it will ultimately harm US economic interests.
Is there anything I shouldn’t include in my comment?
Your comments should not touch on the indirect cost rate negotiation system. This is because although the revisions indicate in the review process that agencies should prioritize lower indirect costs, OMB has stated that Will not consider or answer. Such comments in the final rule.
I was sent a link to another platform to submit my comments.
Comments will only be accepted if posted directly to regulations.gov. do it No Post elsewhere or on external sites.
Are there any resources I can use to create my comments or articles I can read to better understand the edit?
White House tries to tighten political oversight of grantmaking at Science Insider
What We Need to Do Next: OMB’s Proposed Federal Financial Assistance Regulation (OMB-2026-0034) by Elizabeth Jenksy
Council of Nonprofit Organizations Proposed Changes to OMB Uniform Guidance (per Section/Fix Area)
GSA is hosting two one-hour virtual working sessions. Monday, June 29 (4:00-5:00 pm EDT) and Friday, July 10 (9:00-10:00 am EDT), where participants can work on their comments independently, or collaborate with colleagues and discuss comments with others in the Breakout Room. Register to secure your spot; Pop in and out as needed – no need to join for the full hour.
