The Special Competitive Studies Project (SCSP), a nonprofit focused on US technology competitiveness, has filed formal comments urging the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to revise sweeping proposed rule changes to federal research grants, warning that the rules could jeopardize American scientific leadership.
The proposed revisions, which OMB says aim to improve transparency and accountability, would require senior political appointees to review every discretionary award, direct reviewers to weigh presidential policy priorities, downgrade peer review to advisory status, and allow agencies to terminate active research awards if priorities change. SCSP argues that these changes could politicize scientific research and undermine the stability that underpins US innovation.
“Accountability for taxpayer dollars is not optional, and SCSP supports OMB’s stated goals of transparency, research integrity, and stewardship,” said Ylli Bajraktari, SCSP president, in a recent article. “But applied without clear limits, the rule risks damaging the innovation engine that has been the backbone of America’s scientific success.”
The stakes are measurable. SCSP’s 2026 Tech Competition Scorecard found that China holds a decisive lead in robotics for advanced manufacturing, and the narrow US lead in quantum is eroding under Beijing’s coordinated state-backed strategy. Meanwhile, the federally funded share of national R&D dropped by nearly one-third between 2010 and 2019, and federal AI research spending remains far below the $32 billion annual level recommended by the National Security Commission on AI.
Bajraktari emphasized that research grants differ from government contracts. “A research grant supports multiyear experiments, doctoral researchers, and laboratory partners using custom equipment and generating data over time,” he said. “Stopping that work midstream destroys value that reimbursement cannot recover.” The losses extend to companies, investors, national labs, and startups that rely on stable, merit-driven federal funding.
“When award decisions look political rather than technical, or when a grant can vanish because priorities shifted, private partners hedge, talent looks elsewhere, and the whole geometry of innovation weakens,” Bajraktari added.
SCSP’s comments to OMB highlight four key concerns: merit must remain central, awards should be durable, the private sector impact must be considered, and a technology-competitiveness impact assessment is needed. The organization also urged OMB to delay the October 1 effective date to allow agencies time to implement the changes properly.
“America already faces a funding gap,” Bajraktari said. “We should not compound it with a confidence gap.”
Visit scsp.ai to learn more.
