38 Comments
User's avatar
Alissa Resch's avatar

Thank you for the excellent suggestions - appreciate your post 🙏

Elizabeth Ginexi's avatar

Please share! THANKS

Mary-Ellen's avatar

Great information and action plan. Much appreciated.

Jean Bernard Minster's avatar

The summary was outstanding (I added relevant page numbers of a PDF of the original OMB document before sharing). This new action plan is even better. Thank you!

Elizabeth Ginexi's avatar

Thank you for your feedback! And thanks for helping us save science.

Lindsey Smith Taillie, PhD's avatar

I forwarded this to many of the NIH-funded scientists I know. This is beyond alarming! Thank you so much for creating this resource.

Elizabeth Ginexi's avatar

Thank you! Remind everyone that you can submit a comment anonymously if need be. Also, I recommend writing a short comment in the 5000 character box, but also uploading a more detailed comment in the optional upload box.

Lindsey Smith Taillie, PhD's avatar

It seems the advice from our university is that we have to submit as individuals but not as university affiliates in any kind of way. Do these comments still hold weight if we just submit them as lay people or anonymously and not as scientists?

Elizabeth Ginexi's avatar

Yes. OMB is required to read and respond to every single comment. The goal is to bog them down with mass volume. FLOOD THE REGISTER!

Jim's avatar

This is excellent and the suggestions are great - I've already let "my" PIs know via text. There's plenty of more researchers I'd love to tell, but I'd have to use university email and I'd most likely get fired (especially since I've been "spoken to" regarding other communications which sought to inform PIs about how they are being affected by "administration priorities".) for doing so.

I'm an editor/reviewer of proposals, so I don't really know *how* I can voice my disapproval in a way that shows how it impacts me without a) heavily relying on how it impacts those I serve and b) related, making it personal.

If anyone has any suggestions, I'd love to hear them.

Elizabeth Ginexi's avatar

You can submit anonymous comments to the docket. You do not have to list your email or organization. But be very specific about what parts of the new rule you object to and give good reasons why you think they would be harmful to researchers.

emily haozous's avatar

I have been paralyzed with rage and depression since this proposed rule was first posted. Thank you for helping me figure out how to respond.

Eric L's avatar

Just sent in my comments to regulations.gov and also contacted my Colorado Senators and House Representative. Your article was a tremendous help! Not a scientist but scientist-friendly.

Katprof's avatar

this is brilliant helpful information, thank you, I am going to share far and wide. One suggestion if I may: under "Who Should Comment and What They Should Say" could you include a section for the general public? You have very helpful info for the general public down further, but in that section you don't include us, and I almost stopped reading thinking my comment would not be so helpful

Katprof's avatar

thank you for that post too! But I guess I just meant this post DOES have a lot of useful info for the general public below, only indicates it does not earlier on. That's all. I have lots of family members in the general public who are able and willing to comprehend this post.

David Greer's avatar

While Elizabeth focuses on scientic/health/NIH area, the proposed rule is far reaching as it touches on every area of the federal grant process -- housing, transportation, defense, higher education and human services to name a few. A very large coalition needs to come together to oppose this rule. Those areas that have hundreds of millions in grant dollars should take the lead as they will be listened to the most, especially by Congress people with districts where grant money is significant (both Rs and Ds). I work in housing, and this will be devastating for public housing authorities that house low-income Americans.

Amelia's avatar

Thank you for this break down! I used it to write my comment (postdoc in clinical psych) and shared with friends!

Ken Kobayashi's avatar

Great, practical advice. Thank you. Two questions for you:

1.) Does this proposed rule apply to SBIR/America’s Seed Fund, (D)ARPA(-x), NSF I-Corps grants?

2.) How far outside scientific research does the scope of this proposed rule extend? For instance, highway and road maintenance/infrastructure, block grants, education, etc.?

Sean Sublette's avatar

Thank you!!!

Jess Mro's avatar

Done! Thank you for breaking this down. 🧬❤️

Joe Katz's avatar

This is terrific, thank you so much

Benjamin Renquist's avatar

I apprciate the guidance. I fear speaking up and highlighting grants is like putting my neck on the chopping block. Thoughts?

Elizabeth Ginexi's avatar

Great Question. You can submit anonymous comments. You also do not have to go into specific details about your grants. Speak in general about it, but be very specific about which parts of the rule you object to and why.

Katprof's avatar

this is brilliant helpful information, thank you, I am going to share far and wide. One suggestion if I may: under "Who Should Comment and What They Should Say" could you include a section for the general public? You have very helpful info for the general public down further, but in that section you don't include us, and I almost stopped reading thinking my comment would not be so helpful