Tag: Executive Orders

The Effect of Federal Policies on Physics and Physicists

Presentation given 2/12/2025

Useful Websites

Free Speech and Scientific Freedom and Responsibility

Some general statements and resources from professional societies and the literature.

Restrictions on Federal Funding

The following actions were taken, first to restrict government funding and then to rescind or restrain the restrictions.

Limiting overhead paid on NIH grants to 15%

This move would would gut Universities and healthcare research in the U.S.

  • Feb 7, 2025, Friday. The NIH announces that “indirect costs” paid for by grants will be limited to 15%. Currently this rate varies from 25% to 70%; for R1 Universities it is closer to the higher number.
  • Feb 10, 2025. Twenty-two states including Massachusetts filed a complaint, Mass vs NIH, noting that “In Federal fiscal year 2024, UMass Amherst will receive approximately $44.8 million dollars in funding from NIH. Of that total amount, approximately $13.1 million dollars are for indirect costs, based on the NIH Federal indirect cost rate of 61%.”
  • Feb 10, 2025. A temporary restraining order is granted, forbidding cuts to indirect costs for the 22 states that joined the suit.

Funding for Diversity, Equity, Inclusion within federal grants.

This includes the Broader Impacts of NSF grants and PIER (Promoting Inclusive and Equitable Research) plans of DOE grants.

  • Jan 20, 2025 (inauguration day “gift”), executive order “Ending Radical and Wasteful Government DEI Programs and Preferencing” is issued. Eliminates, within 60 days, “all ‘equity action plans,’ ‘equity’ actions, initiatives, or programs, ‘equity-related’ grants or contracts; and all DEI or DEIA performance requirements for employees, contractors, or grantees.”
  • DOE response: “…All open solicitations have been or will be amended to remove the PIER Plan requirement and associated review criterion. For proposals that have already been submitted to the Office of Science, no action on the part of the applicant is required, but applicants will have the option to resubmit a new application with the removal of the PIER plan.” In other words, rebudget. There is no mention of existing grants, but these seem to be covered under the order restraining implementation of M-25-13.
  • NSF response: The words diversity, equity, inclusion do NOT appear anywhere on this website, nor do “broader impacts”. They do state that “The review criteria remain consistent. Guidance on reviews and panel summaries has not changed. Program directors do not comment on activities outside of the purview of the panel. The reviews and panel summaries are advisory to NSF. As has always been the practice at NSF, we will consider this advisory material in conjunction with agency-wide guidance and applicable federal standards when making funding decisions.” In other words, reviews will still take broader impacts that include DEI into account, but program managers can opt not to fund based on administration guidelines.

Suppression of information I – Gender

Executive Order 14168 , so-called “Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government” provides an excellent example of scientific disinformation and suppression of information. It redefined the meaning of sex and gender, cancelled the existence of (among others) the trans community, and required multiple agencies to remove information in conflict with its orders, resulting particularly in the removal of information critical to the health and well-being of women and non-binary members of our society. Many websites disappeared overnight. On Feb 4, Doctors for America filed a lawsuit to restore these sites. On Feb 11, a federal judge in DC issued a temporary restraining order that the websites named in the suit be restored by 11:59 pm. A quick scan makes it seem that the administration is complying with this one.

Suppression of Information II – Climate and Climate justice

I will need to fill this in later. For now, see https://insideclimatenews.org/news/04022025/todays-climate-trump-climate-data-purge-archive/ and note that, again, the administration seems to be taking its ideas from this epitome of doublespeak and disinformation: https://www.commerce.senate.gov/services/files/4BD2D522-2092-4246-91A5-58EEF99750BC

Banned words at NSF

For decades, every NSF grant had to include a section on “broader impacts” which more often than not meant some sort of DEI effort by the PI. The Washington Post reported that “NSF staff have been combing through thousands of active science research projects, alongside a list of keywords, to determine if they include activities that violate Trump’s executive orders.”  They have flagged hundreds, if not thousands, of words, that disqualify a grant from being funded. 

This list appears to be coming from this terrifying Senate document, which makes outrageous and false accusations about how science is done and how the money is spent: https://www.commerce.senate.gov/services/files/4BD2D522-2092-4246-91A5-58EEF99750BC

Roughly one thousand keywords are being “flagged’ in grants, including the word ‘women’ [but not ‘men’], ‘Latina’ or ‘Latinx person’ (but not Latino),’transgender,’ ‘LGBT[QIA+],’ ‘climate change’, ‘clean energy,’ ‘netzero’, BIPOC, ‘anti-racist’, ‘ethnicity’, ‘bigot’, ‘advocate,’ ‘trauma,’ ‘bias’….

That said, as noted above, review panels continue to operate as they always have after a brief pause.  Program managers must take their input into consideration, but also must consider other federal policies. See NSF Implementation of Recent Executive Orders

The effect of export controls on collaborative international research

This is an older topic. Export controls put in place by ITAR and EAR control and limit the types of exports (including data) and interactions that can occur in regards to scientific equipment and exchange. At some national labs, this has restricted the access of international collaborators to the extent that some collaborations are just not possible; this has been the case for more than 20 years now. More recently, Universities have been called on to meet tighter standards in regards to exporting scientific equipment and knowledge, although there are exceptions contained in the regulations for “fundamental research” or “educational exception”. Some useful links are below.