Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Comment period for Vought's OMB rule that puts political commissars in charge of American science: 5 days
The Monarch Diaries
@monarchdiaries.bsky.social
Comment period for Vought’s OMB rule that puts unaccountable political commissars directly in charge of American science funding closes in 5 days.
Comment here:
www.regulations.gov/commenton/OM...
Regulations.gov
www.regulations.gov
7:39 AM · Jul 8, 2026
@monarchdiaries.bsky.social
Comment period for Vought’s OMB rule that puts unaccountable political commissars directly in charge of American science funding closes in 5 days.
Comment here:
www.regulations.gov/commenton/OM...
Regulations.gov
www.regulations.gov
7:39 AM · Jul 8, 2026
Comment period for Vought’s OMB rule that puts unaccountable political commissars directly in charge of American science funding closes in 5 days.
— The Monarch Diaries (@monarchdiaries.bsky.social) 2026-07-08T11:39:51.604Z
Comment here:
www.regulations.gov/commenton/OM...
https://www.regulations.gov/document/OMB-2026-0034-0001:
Although Federal spending through grants and other types of Federal financial assistance has grown exponentially since the initial establishment of OMB's policies in earlier Circulars and 2 CFR, corresponding policies capable of ensuring transparency, accountability, and oversight for this increased level of spending remain deficient in the current regulatory text. As a result, Federal financial assistance programs, and the activities performed under Federal awards, have not always remained properly aligned with core purposes authorized by law, nor served the needs of the American public as intended.
This lack of transparency, accountability, and proper oversight became increasingly clear between 2021 and 2024. Federal awards were often used during those years to promote a “woke” policy agenda that did not reflect the values of the vast majority of the American public. (2) For example, Federal programs and funding opportunities were designed to advance unlawful identity-based “Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion” (DEI) policies and preferences across the country. (3) These policies were inconsistent with basic American values and civil rights laws, including the equal protection principles of the U.S. Constitution. (4) They were also misaligned in many cases with underlying public purposes authorized by law. (5) Collectively, these policies wasted a great amount of taxpayer resources and caused great harm to public trust in government.
The White House Fact Sheet of August 7, 2025, describes examples of the types of wasteful spending that occurred as a result of such policies. For example, Federal grants funded unlawful DEI practices, (6) various anti-American ideologies in American education, (7) non-replicable and highly misleading studies, (8) labs engaged in gain-of-function research, (9) and AI-powered social media censorship tools. (10) More recently, another White House Fact Sheet of January 8, 2026 provided examples of the rampant and pervasive problem of fraud in the United States, including under assistance programs in Minnesota. (11)
Another example of wasteful spending is provided by a 2023 report from Office of Inspector General for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). That report found that recipients of Federal awards from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) potentially misused funds to provide services for illegal immigrants. (12) Such potential abuse of taxpayer funds highlights the need for proper oversight of taxpayer dollars.
In another prominent example, prior to this administration, far-left activists hijacked the critical work done by the U.S. President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), which was established to respond to the AIDS crisis in Africa. Due to wasteful spending, PEPFAR became a left-wing foreign aid entitlement that attempted to promote abortion and gender ideology. Additionally, an August 2025 report from the Heritage Foundation noted that, according to the U.S. House Foreign Affairs Committee, billions of dollars in overhead and program charges flow to nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) and contractors in Washington, DC rather than providing direct humanitarian aid; and insufficient oversight has resulted in significant waste of taxpayer resources. (13)
An additional example is provided by a 2024 report from the U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation regarding the growing failure of objectivity at the National Science Foundation (NSF) during the previous administration. (14) That report found that out of a sample of over three thousand grants, more than ten percent—totaling over two billion dollars in Federal funding—went to “questionable projects that promoted diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) tenets or pushed onto science neo-Marxist perspectives about enduring class struggle.” The report also found that, by 2024, over a quarter of new grants made by NSF (27 percent) directed funding to DEI initiatives and other far-left perspectives. This marked a huge proportional increase over the course of only three years from the 0.29 percent of new grants made by NSF with a similar focus in 2021. (15) This is just a small sample of many examples across the Federal Government of wasteful spending and other misuse and mismanagement of Federal funds.
This lack of transparency, accountability, and proper oversight became increasingly clear between 2021 and 2024. Federal awards were often used during those years to promote a “woke” policy agenda that did not reflect the values of the vast majority of the American public. (2) For example, Federal programs and funding opportunities were designed to advance unlawful identity-based “Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion” (DEI) policies and preferences across the country. (3) These policies were inconsistent with basic American values and civil rights laws, including the equal protection principles of the U.S. Constitution. (4) They were also misaligned in many cases with underlying public purposes authorized by law. (5) Collectively, these policies wasted a great amount of taxpayer resources and caused great harm to public trust in government.
The White House Fact Sheet of August 7, 2025, describes examples of the types of wasteful spending that occurred as a result of such policies. For example, Federal grants funded unlawful DEI practices, (6) various anti-American ideologies in American education, (7) non-replicable and highly misleading studies, (8) labs engaged in gain-of-function research, (9) and AI-powered social media censorship tools. (10) More recently, another White House Fact Sheet of January 8, 2026 provided examples of the rampant and pervasive problem of fraud in the United States, including under assistance programs in Minnesota. (11)
Another example of wasteful spending is provided by a 2023 report from Office of Inspector General for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). That report found that recipients of Federal awards from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) potentially misused funds to provide services for illegal immigrants. (12) Such potential abuse of taxpayer funds highlights the need for proper oversight of taxpayer dollars.
In another prominent example, prior to this administration, far-left activists hijacked the critical work done by the U.S. President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), which was established to respond to the AIDS crisis in Africa. Due to wasteful spending, PEPFAR became a left-wing foreign aid entitlement that attempted to promote abortion and gender ideology. Additionally, an August 2025 report from the Heritage Foundation noted that, according to the U.S. House Foreign Affairs Committee, billions of dollars in overhead and program charges flow to nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) and contractors in Washington, DC rather than providing direct humanitarian aid; and insufficient oversight has resulted in significant waste of taxpayer resources. (13)
An additional example is provided by a 2024 report from the U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation regarding the growing failure of objectivity at the National Science Foundation (NSF) during the previous administration. (14) That report found that out of a sample of over three thousand grants, more than ten percent—totaling over two billion dollars in Federal funding—went to “questionable projects that promoted diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) tenets or pushed onto science neo-Marxist perspectives about enduring class struggle.” The report also found that, by 2024, over a quarter of new grants made by NSF (27 percent) directed funding to DEI initiatives and other far-left perspectives. This marked a huge proportional increase over the course of only three years from the 0.29 percent of new grants made by NSF with a similar focus in 2021. (15) This is just a small sample of many examples across the Federal Government of wasteful spending and other misuse and mismanagement of Federal funds.
3 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
= new reply since forum marked as read
