Megan Molteni, who just started at STAT in 2021 after covering health and science at WIRED, reports on the latest discoveries in genomic medicine, neuroscience, and reproductive tech. If you want to get in touch with her, you can reach Megan on Signal at mmolteni.13.
President Trump has been on a mission to dismantle what he refers to as the “deep state” and “fire rogue bureaucrats” since taking office. His recent efforts have caused quite a stir among scientists who fear that decisions about federal funding for research could become highly politicized in the U.S. The Office of Personnel Management has proposed reclassifying many federal bureaucrats as political appointees, giving the administration the power to hire and fire them at will. This move has raised concerns, especially among former National Institutes of Health officials, who see it as a way to make the directors of the agency’s institutes and centers political appointees without necessary civil service protections.
Jeremy Berg, a former leader at one of the NIH’s institutes, expressed his worries about the potential consequences of this reclassification. He highlighted the risks of increased political influence, instability, and the loss of experienced staff who play a crucial role in managing NIH operations effectively.
Overall, the proposed changes have sparked a heated debate among scientists and policymakers, with many questioning the implications for the future of research funding and the independence of scientific decision-making in the U.S. The move to reclassify federal bureaucrats has raised red flags about the potential for political interference in crucial scientific matters. Scientists are keeping a close eye on how this situation unfolds and what it could mean for the integrity of research and innovation in the country.
