Speeches and Floor Statements

Congressman Don Beyer, a former long-time member of the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology and the U.S. Representative for a Northern Virginia congressional district that includes the National Science Foundation (NSF), spoke on the House floor this evening as part of a special order hour on the newly reintroduced Scientific Integrity Act. Beyer condemned Trump Administration censorship of NSF grants and larger attacks on the American scientific community. Beyer’s remarks follow below, and video is available here:

I rise today in strong opposition to the Trump administration’s unconscionable and irresponsible attacks on America’s scientific integrity.

The very foundation of our success as a world power has been our scientific prowess, and now Trump is threatening to undermine that success.

That is why I am here to talk about my bill with Rep. Tonko - the Scientific Integrity Act – and to defend the foundation of what makes the United States a global leader – our scientific leadership and infrastructure.

I am proud to represent the National Science Foundation, headquartered in Alexandria, Virginia, in the heart of Virginia’s 8^th Congressional District.

NSF is truly an incredible resource and institution.

It was established in 1950 by Congress as an independent agency to promote scientific advancement in the United States.

For 75 years now, it has repeatedly accomplished this goal.

NSF has helped keep the U.S. at the forefront of scientific discovery.

It helped catalyze the internet, develop the technology for MRI machines and 3-D printing, create American Sign Language, detect gravitational waves, develop LASIK eye surgery, and more.

Over its lifetime, NSF has supported over 350,000 scientists.

And, of this number, 262 have been Nobel Prize winners.

Trump has already begun unprecedented attacks on the scientific community, with purges of NSF workers and grants, scientific advisors, and the broader scientific workforce.

I strongly oppose these efforts to target the National Science Foundation and weaken one of the guiding lights that makes American strong. 

I am also deeply concerned about this new era of censorship of science.

NSF employees were reportedly given a list of words to look for in grants to flag them for possible termination.

M. Speaker, I invite you to take a look at this list here behind me.

This is just a portion of the full list of words, but it is a representative sample—oh wait, I can’t use “representative,” as it’s on the longer list.

What’s most frustrating to me is that many of these words are just standard words you would use in basic science.

Why the censorship?

The list contains “women” and “female”, but no mention of “men” or “male.”

There is “black” and “indigenous” on this list, but no “white.”

It’s very clear that the only identity not censored on this list is mine.

But why is being a women or being part of a Tribe make you ineligible for science.

Why is the Trump Administration attacking tribal communities?

I don’t understand this censorship of indigenous communities, but also its clear the person who wrote this list has never been a scientist.

It is ill-fitting, unwise, and actively harmful for scientific purposes.

The inclusion of many of these words like “bias,” “included,” and “excluded,” clearly shows that none of the people in charge of making this censorship list were scientists. 

If there were any scientists involved, they would know that many of these words are very commonly used in scientific papers. 

M. Speaker, imagine if you were a grant applicant, applying to develop the newest MRI technology or develop a new drug locally, or if you were on the precipice of discovering a new gene in a plant, or if you were about to take pictures of two black holes for the first time. 

And imagine this is your life’s work. 

And now imagine having to comb through your proposal or your dissertation that you have spent months or years working on, just to find every instance of these words listed here.

It doesn’t matter if your instance of the word “polarization” refers to the magnetic field in an MRI machine, instead of political polarization.

It doesn’t matter if your use of “indigenous” is referring to an indigenous plant, or if “activism” refers to the state of an enzyme, or if “inclusion” or “excluded” refers to statistical analysis or the variables you are using. 

It doesn’t matter if “black” refers to the black hole you’re studying. 

Your study is going to now be flagged by Trump’s cronies at DOGE – who based on their flow chart on how to handle these words, will find any way to terminate your program regardless of the intent.

The fact that these commonly used words are on this list indicates a lack of consideration of basic science—(someone should have spent more time in high school physics or biology class).

This list also indicates that the Trump administration is sending NSF on an internal manhunt—one that will waste an incredible amount of time and energy that could be much better used on advancing critical science. 

If this list forces scientists rewrite papers to avoid or minimize use of the words found on this arbitrary list, it further delays their already long grant process—then it hurts science. 

If this list delays a drug’s development or incredible discoveries that keep America at the forefront of scientific development—then it hurts science. 

If scientists are interrogated by DOGE to determine if their use of “polarization” refers to a scientific principle or political principle—then it hurts science.

If our scientists have to seriously reconsider whether they even want to apply for the grant in the first place—then it hurts science. 

And if this treatment of our science and our scientists escalates and pushes scientists out of America or out of the field—then it hurts our economy, and the future of our country. 

It is time to stop this madness and protect the American success story. 

So that is why I am here today.

To defend these attacks on America, our science, and the NSF.

This is why our Scientific Integrity Act is so important. 

This bill would call on agencies to develop scientific integrity standards.

We need scientists, not corrupt industry hacks leading our future.

I urge my colleagues to join us on the Scientific Integrity Act and act now to protect America’s international leadership.