Comment on Trump’s and Vought’s huge federal grant rule change by July 13
The Trump administration plans to change the federal research grants process in ways that would cripple science in the United States. Oregonians need to tell Office of Management and Budget Director Russell Vought that we won’t stand for these rule changes. The current rules have worked well for decades, with experts in research fields doing rigorous peer review deciding which projects get federal funding based on scientific merit. That system has made science in the U.S. a huge success: Of the 86 people who have been awarded Nobel Prizes in the sciences in the last 10 years, 44 went to researchers affiliated with U.S. institutions. But Trump and Vought want to politically control science as never before.
Remember the anti-democracy Project 2025 that was part of Trump’s platform in the last election? Russell Vought is one of its chief architects. Now he aims to overrule scientists, giving political appointees the final say over research funding. Former National Institutes of Health official Elizabeth Ginexi explains the consequences in her Substack (“Summary of Key Changes in OMB’s Proposed Federal Financial Assistance Rule: Russell Vought is going to destroy American Science,” May 28, 2026). Under the proposed rules, political appointees would call the shots and only projects that “demonstrably advance the President’s policy priorities” would receive funding. The proposed rules would prohibit support for research that would “fund, promote . . . or facilitate” ideas like diversity, equity and inclusion or “gender ideology.” Applicants could be denied funding based on their “affiliations” with professional or political groups. So much for the First Amendment and scientific inquiry.
But it’s not just science funding that would be wrecked. Ginexi’s Substack article “This New OMB Rule is Bigger Than Science. Much Bigger” (June 1, 2026) explains how the rule change would derail the larger process of federal funding for programs that people in local communities depend on, like Medicaid, transportation funds, and food aid. Ginexi sounds the alarm and gives practical advice on writing personal, powerful comments about why the proposal is harmful. Everyone, whether they’re a researcher or a concerned citizen, should comment on how this new, hyper-political funding process would hurt the science, programs and people they care about.
Public comments for the proposed rule are open till July 13. Go to https://www.regulations.gov/document/OMB-2026-0034-0001 to see the proposed rule changes and to submit your comment.
—Dorothy Leman
RE: Letters to the Editor: Street Safety (June 18, 2026)
I appreciated Jim Reichle’s article last week reminding us about street safety; however, I would like to remind bicyclists that rules of the road are for everyone, bicyclists included.
A few days ago, I was stopped at the stop sign on 4th and Olney. There were several cars patiently waiting their turn when a bicyclist blew right through the stop sign and proceeded to “wave” as she went past. I thought the rules of the road applied to everyone and would like the same courtesy applied to me as I respect the bicyclist rights. When driving, I try to be cautious and aware of other motorists, bicyclists, and pedestrians in order for all of us to be safe.
Street safety is for EVERYONE.
—Carol Loesche
Re: Letters to the Editor: Street Safety (June 18, 2026)
The June 18 Letter of the Week stated: “it is always illegal to make a U-turn in Oregon UNLESS a sign allows it.” I can’t find any state law that supports this statement. ORS 811.365, titled “Illegal U-turn” says, as briefly as I can paraphrase it, that U-turns are illegal: 1) at intersections controlled by electronic signals, unless posted otherwise; 2) on a highway within an incorporated city between intersections; and 3) at any place in an incorporated city where your vehicle can’t be seen by approaching vehicles from 500 feet in either direction (1,000 feet outside cities).
As I read it, that means you can make a U-turn anywhere else.
The letter writer also stated it is always illegal to enter a bike lane to make a right turn on red, and I can’t find any support for that, either. In fact, ORS 811.440(2)(a) says “A person may operate a motor vehicle upon a bicycle lane when: (a)Making a turn.” Of course, other statutes require you to yield to bicyclists in a bike lane.
We should all drive safely. Incorrect advice about driving laws does not advance that goal.
—Greg Opfel
We appreciate our readers flagging the errors in a previous Letter to the Editor. We regret publishing the errors. —Managing Editor Nic Moye
MAKE LOCAL JOURNALISM HAPPEN
Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.
