Planetary Radio: Space Policy Edition
Jun 5, 2026 · 52 min · 10 segments
Casey Dreier is joined by Liz Ginexi, a former Program Officer at the U.S. National Institutes of Health, to break down a 400-page proposed rule change from the U.S. Office of Management and Budget…
No entities detected.
Liz GinexiGuest
Casey DreierHost
On May twenty-ninth, the White House's Office of Management and Budget released a four-hundred-page set of proposed rule changes that affect the entire gamut of how the United States distributes congressionally appropriated funds that enable fundamental scientific research.
We're talking about grants that fund NASA research, people who want to study data from the Mars rovers.
We're talking about even beyond that to fundamental biomedical research, community block grants, housing assistance, everything in terms of what the government does.
They egregiously, I believe, change fundamental aspects that restrict the idea of free inquiry and also the effectiveness of public investment in science.
If nothing else, adding layers of punishing bureaucracy, centralizing control, and using forms of financial intimidation to restrict freedom of association and free speech.
If this sounds hyperbolic, it reasonably does, but it, it's honestly, it's right there in the page.
The government claims procedural rules to cancel and terminate contracts or grants at any moment for any reason without having to provide justification.
They now would require political review instead of merit-based peer review of all grant awards and even grant opportunities.
That means a intentionally, and this is specific, a partisan operator from the White House, whether it's this one or a future one, would have the say and actually be encouraged to not defer to the merit-based review process in who to award grants to.
It actually would add risks and punishments of being in certain institutions, membership organizations that the White House considers anti-American or against administration priorities.
It allows the immediate termination for associating or even speaking on issues unrelated to your grant.
This is a recipe for the suppression of scientific inquiry in the United States.
We want to have science influence and direct how and where we go with robotics and with humans.
And if we create a system in this country that is controlled by fear or uncertainty or capricious application of unaccounted, heavy bureaucratic partisan operations on fundamental scientific investment, we will not have an effective scientific space program.
On May twenty-ninth, the White House's Office of Management and Budget released a four-hundred-page set of proposed rule changes that affect the entire gamut of how the United States distributes congressionally appropriated funds that enable fundamental scientific research.
We're talking about grants that fund NASA research, people who want to study data from the Mars rovers.
We're talking about even beyond that to fundamental biomedical research, community block grants, housing assistance, everything in terms of what the government does.
They egregiously, I believe, change fundamental aspects that restrict the idea of free inquiry and also the effectiveness of public investment in science.
If nothing else, adding layers of punishing bureaucracy, centralizing control, and using forms of financial intimidation to restrict freedom of association and free speech.
If this sounds hyperbolic, it reasonably does, but it, it's honestly, it's right there in the page.
The government claims procedural rules to cancel and terminate contracts or grants at any moment for any reason without having to provide justification.
They now would require political review instead of merit-based peer review of all grant awards and even grant opportunities.
That means a intentionally, and this is specific, a partisan operator from the White House, whether it's this one or a future one, would have the say and actually be encouraged to not defer to the merit-based review process in who to award grants to.
It actually would add risks and punishments of being in certain institutions, membership organizations that the White House considers anti-American or against administration priorities.
It allows the immediate termination for associating or even speaking on issues unrelated to your grant.
This is a recipe for the suppression of scientific inquiry in the United States.
We want to have science influence and direct how and where we go with robotics and with humans.
And if we create a system in this country that is controlled by fear or uncertainty or capricious application of unaccounted, heavy bureaucratic partisan operations on fundamental scientific investment, we will not have an effective scientific space program.
The rest of this transcript — segmented and speaker-labeled, so you land on the exact moment something was said
Search every transcript — by keyword, by phrase, or by meaning, across every show Radar indexes
Trends — what is surging across podcasts, measured against its own baseline
Alerts — when a name you follow appears in a newly indexed episode
No account is needed to search Radar.