Reports described a plan to establish a committee that could oversee—and potentially veto—science grants issued by the U.S. National Institutes of Health. Advocates and scientists warned the approach would undermine independent peer review and could shift grant decisions away from scientific expertise toward political considerations. The proposed structure reportedly includes senior political figures and would add an extra approval layer to NIH funding decisions, which historically rely on expert evaluation of proposals. Critics pointed to the large NIH budget supporting cancer, Alzheimer’s, and other biomedical priorities. The reporting also framed Congress’ prior actions blocking related regulations as a signal of political resistance, while the NIH leadership and scientific community continue to debate what “modernization” should look like in early federal funding governance.