[ocschwar]

This ends science in the United States.

You can't really enroll graduate students for a 5 year PHD project if their funding can be pulled at a moment's notice like this.

[russellbeattie]

This year is definitely the beginning of the end for American scientific leadership. The damage being done is incalculable.

The best and brightest simply aren't going to want to come to the U.S. for an uncertain future where they'll be harassed at the airport every trip and then defunded or deported at any time for "political" reasons (a.k.a. racism, bigotry, religion, ignorance and anti-intellectualism).

Amazingly, we're only 200 days into this administration.

We have 3 years, 5 months and 12 days left, assuming we still have free and fair elections in 2028.

For the next several years, the administration is going to continue to dismantle our country's foundations brick by brick, enabled by Congress and SCOTUS. The attack on immigrants is in full swing, but the total takeover of science, public education, universities and mass media is actually just beginning.

[ethbr1]

> We have 3 years, 5 months and 12 days left

The midterms are in 2026. A swapped House (and/or Senate, but less likely) would drastically shift power.

[yibg]

Personally I'm not very confident even in the next free and fair election things will change materially. Trump is the public face but the reason he's in office and also has control of congress is because Americans voted that way. It's not very clear that if elections were held tomorrow, that the result would go any different.

[jrs235]

But but but American Exceptionalism! Americans are the best and brightest! The rest of the world can't compete! /s

Those doing and supporting what's happening a) care only about power, b) honestly think they and America is superior, c) both and d) think this time is different assuming they are educated and know history.

[msgodel]

Whether it's real or just poor communication a lot of the country felt like the scientific institutions had been weaponized against them. Maybe the constituents of those institutions even believed either making themselves an enemy of the public or creating PR indicating they were was moral but the practical reality of public institutions is that they must have the trust of the public or they will come to an end.

Hopefully people remember this for next time.

[Yizahi]

This ends USA, full stop. Not this particular executive order, but his orders in general. It's been half a year and that orange turd has completely overtaken USA legislative branch with this "economic emergency", while bobbleheads in the Congress just signed it away voluntarily. And now he is taking preliminary shots at the judicial branch, trying to eradicate judges who aren't bending the knee. All the while testing through his minions if it would be possible to tear down constitution too and remain in power permanently.

[mathiaspoint]

It may be that the Americans don't like what the USA has turned into and want it to end.

[tsoukase]

Trump governs literally as any corrupt leader in any poor country does since ages: he feeds the people with cheap, superficial lies that they like to hear (we call it, he lets them suck a pacifier) while secretly stuffing his mates with money and power.

But that happens in unprecedented amounts in a developed and organised country, maybe soon developing...

[sizzle]

What can we do about it?

[FredPret]

To play devil's advocate:

- science funding is controlled by the state (and thus politics) in many leading countries, especially China. Doesn't seem to hold them back

- the US pays people vastly more than other countries, and will continue to have the ability to fund expensive research more than others. Maybe it will regain the political will to do so in coming years

You're right that uncertainty is deadly to investment, and signing up for 5 years of a PhD is certainly an investment. But it's hard to see this turn into an actual brain drain, if only for lack of a better place to go.

[redserk]

In a completely isolated bubble I’d be inclined to agree that scientific research might not do so badly, but the current set of politics completely rejects generally-accepted scientific norms.

After all, why bother doing research when the guy ultimately responsible for choosing your funding will take a sharpie to any data you collect if it looks bad?

[WillPostForFood]

This ends science in the United States.

Probably not. Grants were always under political control, right? This is just shifting political control from one part of a government agency to another part of the government agency.

[jjk166]

> Individual grants will also require clearance from a political appointee and "must, where applicable, demonstrably advance the President’s policy priorities."

> The order also instructs agencies to formalize the ability to cancel previously awarded grants at any time if they're considered to "no longer advance agency priorities."

[noelwelsh]

The key phrase in the article is "political appointee". Previously, approval was by government employees who had expertise in the given field.

[ocschwar]

Until now, once you got a grant, you could count on it.

Now? One of your grad students says something a little too on the nose on Bsky, and your lab gets shut down.

[tremon]

Grants were always under political control, right?

Sure. In the same vein, you have always been at war with Eurasia.

[SubiculumCode]

Trash.

[birn559]

Not sure how to read it. Do you believe covid-19 virus came from an US (funded) lab? I have never heard of that theory.

[derangedHorse]

Most of my friends got grants from industry. Relying on federal grants to build up a generation of grad students in any field seems like a recipe for disaster. This change might actually bring a higher standard of tax-payer funded research if it enables the public to have faster feedback mechanisms when research stagnates or is misaligned with the public interest.

[themafia]

I genuinely don't understand this. This is due to my lack of experience in University since I never went, and my experience with laboratories, since I've only ever been in one, much to the annoyance of my best friends girlfriend at the time, who was studying Chinook and their spawning behavior.

My understanding is the grants you're talking about are generally for small student salaries as they work on a given project simultaneously with their continued education. Is there not another way to fund these projects? Is there not a better way to engage students into these projects? I don't recall most students having a wide array of choices when it comes to taking on these opportunities.

Is this not a chance to improve a rather ancient and clumsy system?

[pyrale]

> Is this not a chance to improve a rather ancient and clumsy system?

I seriously doubt that there is any will to improve the system.

> My understanding is the grants you're talking about are generally for small student salaries as they work on a given project simultaneously with their continued education.

Grants cover a much larger part of the work at labs. Basically, a grant could be paying anything except tenured salaries and administrative costs.

[noelwelsh]

Grants are usually for projects. Projects may include a portion for postgraduate students, but also pay a lot of other things such as running costs for a lab, travel, conference fees, etc. The costs of running, say, a biology lab are very high (lots of equipment, need to employ technicians as well).