Well, for some reason it took a while for the incoherent whiners to find Sally Rockey’s blog post in which she published OER’s response to the Benezra petition. But they have! Oh, they have!
As at least some of the commenters there have recognized, the number of grants that can be funded each fiscal year is zero-sum (leaving aside for this purpose the issue of grant size). Thus, the *only* possible thing that can be coherently argued as a problem with the A2 sunset is that without A2s, there are some grants being funded that shouldn’t be if there were A2s, and some grants not being funded that should be.
So I ask this of those who are arguing strenuously for return of A2s: what is the nature of these grants that are being funded that shouldn’t be, and those grants that aren’t being funded that should be?
And to amplify: You *can’t* only tell us about grants that should have been funded that weren’t. You *must* also tell us about grants that were funded but shouldn’t have been. Asserting the former without the latter is completely logically incoherent, and not worthy of anyone who considers herself to be a scientist.