There was a time when the nation’s birthday was something I celebrated with a cookout, things that went boom and gathered with friends and family.
This year was supposed to be something special. However, living hours from friends and among those who think Stephen Miller’s dream of having nation absent of anyone disabled, elderly, tan or darker or with an education (or brains) is optimal, I am staying home. Oh, and the heat. There is no way I am spending more than a minute a time in this blast furnace.
I cooked veggie dogs for Jim and I, and he had corn on the cob. He saved the last quarter for me. Yes, I don’t mind munching the last of the cob, ferpetesake I kiss the guy. We didn’t have buns so I toasted seed bread for him and keto bread for me in the pan I fried the dogs in with some butter until the side that goes next to the dog was crispy. A little thing he taught me some years ago when things like that were more in our summer rotation. For the meal, the only thing missing was watermelon, but I am not complaining.
Today I am writing a protest letter for the (big town) paper in regard to the Project 2025 rule that all grants going in front of the OMB will now be required to under go political review by an administration appointee. Anything that does not align with the administration’s objectives will be denied.
The problem is that the usual method of grant approval is that there is peer review. So, say you are looking for a grant for grad students to study the economic impact of food assistance in rural towns. The administration is cutting food assistance, so the political sway of that grant reviewer leans in the “deny” category because it is very likely (I would say “certain”) that the political reviewer would get some kind of reward for turning down grants, and, this administration has made clear that anyone needing help is a TAKER and we don’t need those.
But what would that grant have done for the localized area? There would have wages paid to the people gathering data, awareness of the benefits of food assistance, state tax collection on the wages of workers on the grant, and a group of grad students would be able to make the case for appropriate food assistance.
But now that would not even happen.
My letter explains that the state I live in received $2.72 for every $1 they sent to the feds in 2025. Cut out discretionary grants and that could fall by half - since half of our grants were defense related. The other half is in danger.
Do I expect this to go anywhere? Hell no. My senators include one whose family has had someone on the Hill for 40 years, one who never paid his taxes and is getting away with it, and my congressman is the nephew of the first senator mentioned. They are in it for themselves, while 250,000 of my fellow state citizens do not have access to clean drinking water - an issue that has persisted for decades.
But sitting here and doing nothing about it isn’t going to help.
If you would like to comment on the proposed rule, comment
in the Federal Register at https://www.regulations.gov/document/OMB-2026-0034-0001
before July 13. Who knows? Maybe they will get that it is a good idea to listen to the people who are footing the grift.
Loading comments...