The federal government distributes roughly $1 trillion through grants and other financial assistance. For too long, these funds have flowed with insufficient oversight, often advancing ideological agendas rather than national priorities. 

President Donald Trump and Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Director Russell Vought are attempting to change that.

The OMB proposed revisions to 2 CFR mark a decisive shift. By transforming the Uniform Guidance into a binding Uniform Grants Regulation, OMB is delivering transparency, accountability and alignment with the will of the American people.

Critics in academia, scientific societies and Senate Democrats warn of “politicization,” threats to “international collaboration” and harm to “broadening participation.” These objections mask resistance to basic reforms: ensuring taxpayer dollars serve U.S. interests, prioritizing merit and curbing waste, fraud and abuse. The proposed changes empower policymakers over entrenched bureaucrats to steer funding, while imposing rigorous safeguards.

Central to the reforms is restoring decision-making authority to administration officials accountable to the public. Updates to merit reviews require senior appointees to conduct independent reviews of discretionary awards. Proposals must demonstrably advance federal law and presidential priorities, with agencies exercising judgment beyond routine deference to peer review. Where the existing process has too often funded gain-of-function research or questionable NIH studies on transgender “animal experiments involving mice, rats and monkeys,” the change ensures science and programs reflect the priorities of Americans who pay the bills, not self-perpetuating bureaucratic or academic echo chambers. Critics decry “political oversight,” but it fulfills our constitutional vision: elected leaders and their appointees direct public resources not the bureaucracy.

The rules also demand a more deliberate approach to program design. Agencies must ground funding in clear, measurable objectives tied to statutory intent and national needs. Paired with expanded pre-award risk assessments, this weeds out applicants lacking financial capacity or burdened by histories of questionable practices, plagiarism, discrimination or affiliations that threaten public safety. This renewed focus on proposal merit and recipient risk represents a strong effort to prevent fraud, waste and abuse before dollars are disbursed.

The proposal prioritizes American taxpayers and entities. New provisions generally restrict R&D awards to U.S. entities, with narrow exceptions requiring high-level approval. It extends restrictions on collaborations with “covered foreign countries”—adversaries or nations posing national security risks—banning use of federal funds for direct activities with such entities. This domestic-first approach halts the subsidization of potential adversaries, redirecting resources to strengthen U.S. innovation and protect sensitive knowledge.

Stronger conflict-of-interest rules require disclosure of recent federal employees involved in applications or awards. Mandatory disclosures of potential fraud or misconduct are now referred swiftly to the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia, ensuring real prosecution rather than endless bureaucratic reviews.

The proposal explicitly bans federal funds for diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives that conflict with anti-discrimination laws, efforts promoting “gender ideology” that deny biological sex realities or support “transitioning” children and disparate-impact theory. These changes reject divisive, identity-based preferences in favor of equal opportunity and individual merit. Taxpayers should not underwrite contested social engineering disguised as science or workforce development.

Improved outcomes require real accountability. The reforms expand agencies’ ability to terminate grants “for convenience,” like federal contracts, when recipients fail to deliver results, align with priorities, or meet reporting requirements. This deters waste, enforces sub-recipient transparency and allows swift redirection to higher-performing organizations. Integrated with tools like Do Not Pay, it closes loopholes that have let fraud persist.

Additional commonsense measures boost accessibility: clearer grant competitions on grants.gov, opportunities for small and local organizations to compete against D.C. giants and curbs on funding for political activities including voter registration drives.

Detractors claim these changes undermine peer review, global science and inclusion. In reality, they reclaim control from unaccountable intermediaries and refocus grants on tangible benefits, national security and fiscal responsibility. By prioritizing merit, American entities, fraud prevention and policy alignment, OMB’s proposal honors the principle that the government serves the people.

As the $1 trillion grant ecosystem is reformed, Americans can expect better stewardship: funds advancing U.S. priorities rather than foreign or ideological interests; decisions reflecting the people’s will, not bureaucratic inertia; and the expanded power to terminate failing projects. This is the government of the people, by the people, and for the people—restored. The proposed rule deserves strong support.

Stephen Billy worked at OMB during both the 45th and 47th Trump administrations focusing on federal management policy, including 2 CFR and grants management.

All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.