AFT, AAUP and Stand Up for Science host higher ed action hour to stop the White House from politicizing scientific research

The Trump administration is trying to undermine the process for receiving federal funding for scientific research by using political appointees-instead of independent scientists-to approve research proposals, a move that would place projects on topics such as gender identity, climate change and public health at risk of losing out on federal funding.

The Office of Management and Budget proposed a rule in late May that would, among other things, block any federal funding for research proposals that don't align with the Trump administration's views. The rule, if approved, would harm academic researchers, graduate students, postdocs and full-time faculty who often rely on federal dollars for their research and employment.

The American Association of University Professors and the AFT are mobilizing to fight back. In a joint statement, the two organizations said OMB's proposed rule would make scientific research less reliable, less responsive to the public's needs and more susceptible to censorship and manipulation.

"Forcing political allegiance that explicitly ignores scientific consensus will create a public research crisis," the AFT and the AAUP said. "Disruptions of funding for biomedical, climate resiliency and other critical research will hurt all of us, in red states and blue. The politicization of research funding will impact treatments for cancer, heart disease, diabetes, Alzheimer's disease and a myriad of other public health concerns and undermine the scientific and technological research that drives regional and state economies."

OMB will be accepting public comments only until July 13, so join thousands of union members and make your voice heard.

How to leave a comment

Go to the "AAUP/AFT Stand Up for Science | Add Your Voice to Stop OMB's Attack on American Science" portal to add a comment.

Provide the required information, such as your name, address and email.

Leave your desired message to OMB in the box under "Message."

Below the message box, there is an optional space where you can identify whether you are affiliated with a specific organization; please include the name of your AFT affiliate or your AAUP chapter.

Once you complete the required fields, scroll down and click "Act Now!" Then, consider asking your colleagues to make their voices heard as well.

Standing up for science and diversity, equity and inclusion

The AFT and the AAUP held a higher ed action hour on June 18, as part of our joint campaign to defend and strengthening higher education. It was attended by higher education members from across our unions.

During the session, activists shared how this proposed rule would affect the work they do in labs and its impact on public health and the broader community.

Alex Diaz-Papkovich, a member of the Brown Postdoc Labor Organization and a postdoctoral researcher at Brown University's Data Science Institute, focuses on making sure there is fair and equitable representation of human samples in biobanks-facilities that store biological samples like blood and tissue for research. But the changes that OMB is proposing threaten his research.

"Diversity, equity and inclusion are really central to good genetic research," he said.

"We have these big issues. Can we even use these terms? Can we talk about the human genome diversity project? There's a lot at stake here, and we're talking about billions of dollars in research and biomedical health, biomedical studies-fundamental science."

Rick Zimmerman, a former professor at Wayne State University and a member of the Wayne Academic Union who studies sexual health behavior and HIV prevention, emphasized why it's so important for federal research to be conducted on how illnesses affect underrepresented groups.

"If one is insisting that race and sexual orientation and gender identity not be considered, that will dramatically impact negatively interventions to decrease the prevalence of hypertension, diabetes and HIV, which are huge problems to our population," he said.

AAUP member Melissa Rogers, an associate professor of microbiology, biochemistry and molecular genetics at Rutgers New Jersey Medical School, reviewed grant applications from the National Institutes of Health for over 30 years. She credited the review process as one that led to "phenomenal advances in biomedical sciences and other technologies and ensured that our tax dollars are well-spent."

But OMB's new proposed rule, she said, would further destabilize the rigorous and historically successful funding that has made American scientists the best in the world.

Bonnie A. Green, a member of the Association of Pennsylvania State College and University Faculties, psychology professor at East Stroudsburg University and a former National Science Foundation expert, said she is concerned that cuts to federal research grants would harm community colleges and four-year regional universities like hers that are often sub-awardees.

She also mentioned that advisory boards that aren't mandated by Congress are being eliminated. This federal change would stifle the voices of the teachers, nonprofit leaders and educational institution leaders who sit on these boards, she said, and could have consequences for K-12 STEM education as well as science research.

"We need to make sure that the right voices are in the right places," Green said.

[Alvin Buyinza]