By Kanishka Singh
WASHINGTON, July 13 (Reuters) - Top U.S. universities and research advocates urged President Donald Trump's administration on Monday to withdraw a proposed rule on federal grants that critics say would politicize the process of distributing, administering and terminating grants.
Here are details:
• The proposals would authorize agencies to unilaterally modify or terminate awards based on shifting policy priorities or national-interest determinations, while eliminating existing appeals
processes, according to the American Hospital Association.
• The proposals were made in a May 29 notice of proposed rulemaking issued by the White House's Office of Management and Budget that would revise the government's guidance for federal financial assistance, commonly known as the "Uniform Guidance."
• "Many of the proposed changes would weaken the merit-based, expert-driven system that has made U.S. research the global standard," Johns Hopkins University Interim Provost Lainie Rutkow and its vice provost for research, Denis Wirtz, said in a letter to the White House.
• The proposals would "destabilize the nation's innovation ecosystem," they added.
• Georgetown University said it opposed the White House's proposed changes to its expert peer review, research outcomes and restrictions on international collaboration and partnerships.
• The American Association for Cancer Research said the proposals would "severely set back our nation's medical science enterprise and delay the groundbreaking treatments pivotal to improving patient outcomes and saving lives."
• The Trump administration says the revisions are aimed at improving transparency, accountability and oversight for federal grants.
• Trump has used the threat of federal funding suspensions against universities and research institutions over a range of issues.
• These include pro-Palestinian protests against U.S. ally Israel's assault on Gaza, diversity initiatives, transgender policies and climate programs.
• The National Council of Nonprofits, the American Council on Education and dozens of education associations said the proposals would shift grant decisions from merit to politics by requiring political appointees to decide which grants get funding.
(Reporting by Kanishka Singh in Washington; Editing by Jamie Freed)
