1. United States
2. Maine
3. Letter

As your constituent, I urge you to review the proposed Office of Management and Budget (OMB) rule in Docket OMB-2026-0034 and assess its implications for congressional authority before the July 13, 2026 comment deadline. The rule would expand executive control over federal grants and diminish Congress’s role in directing appropriated funds. OMB Would Weaken Congress’s Power of the Purse On May 29, 2026, OMB proposed revisions to Title 2 of the Code of Federal Regulations (2 C.F.R.) Part 200, the Uniform Guidance governing federal grants. The proposal would centralize authority in OMB and allow future changes without agency-specific rulemaking that aids oversight. Grants are one of the principal mechanisms through which Congress implements national priorities established through legislation and appropriations. Loper Bright Requires Clear Congressional Authority The Supreme Court’s decision in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo (2024) reinforces that agencies must rely on authority clearly granted by Congress. OMB has not been clearly authorized to create a government-wide political review system for scientific grants or let agencies terminate funded awards on undefined policy grounds. Undefined “National Interest” Authority Invites Overreach Proposed Section 200.340 would let agencies terminate grants when officials decide an award no longer serves the “national interest.” That phrase is undefined and lacks clear limits. This could override Congress’s funding judgments. Political Appointees Should Not Override Science The proposal would require senior political appointees to review discretionary research grants and would make clear that peer-review recommendations are not binding. Research relies on independent expert review. Political preclearance would threaten research integrity and scientific merit. Congress Must Assess The Legal, Fiscal, And Scientific Implications The proposal affects states, local governments, tribes, universities, hospitals, nonprofits, research institutions, and other recipients. Congress should ensure that the proposal’s legal, fiscal, and scientific implications are fully understood before any final rule is issued. Congress Should Respond Before The Rule Becomes Final The comment period closes on July 13, 2026. Congressional review is essential to protect legislative authority and federal science. Congress should: (1) Conduct oversight hearings on the proposed political review and grant-termination provisions and their impact on Congress’s spending authority. (2) Consider legislation protecting scientific peer review and setting clear statutory standards for cancellation of congressionally funded grant awards. Thank you.