G protein‐coupled receptors interact with the GDP‐bound heterotrimeric G‐protein, G protein‐coupled receptor kinases (GRKs), and arrestins through their cytosolic surface. Previous studies suggest that the interaction of GRKs and the heterotrimer with the receptor occur in the same space; therefore, there is likely steric hindrance allowing only one pathway to operate at a time. Supporting this claim, experimentally induced competition for the intracellular heterotrimeric G‐protein binding site results in a reduction in GRK and Gα function. We created a Gαs chimera, called sis, containing most of the helical domain of Gαi1. In initial studies, sis prevented GRK2, 4, 5, and 6‐mediated reductions in isoproterenol‐mediated cAMP accumulation. Therefore, we tested the hypothesis that sis disrupts GRK/arrestin function due to an alteration in the turnover of the sis protein. To exclude any background effects of endogenous Gαs, we used GnasE2−/E2− MEFs re‐expressing Gαs (control) or sis (experimental) as well as the β2‐adrenergic receptor. Experimentally, cAMP accumulation in the presence and absence of receptor and GRK inhibitors, receptor‐Gs kinetics, and receptor internalization were measured. The introduction of the Gαi1 helical domain into Gαs did not significantly affect the biochemistry of the chimeric sis protein; however, GRK function and cAMP production altered. GRK2 failed to attenuate isoproterenol‐mediated cAMP accumulation in sis‐expressing cells, but attenuated cAMP accumulation in Gs‐expressing cells. Accordingly, the rate of endocytosis decreased in sis‐expressing cells compared to Gαs‐expressing cells at 10 μM, but not 0.1 and 1 μM, isoproterenol (0.77 ± 0.10 versus 1.00 ± 0.14 min−1). The kinetics of 10 μM isoproterenol‐mediated cAMP production demonstrates that the rate of accumulation of cAMP is similar, yet sis‐expressing cells have an increase in maximal response, and the rate of degradation of cAMP fits two different models. Degradation of cAMP in Gαs‐expressing cells is fit to a classical first‐order equation with a rate constant of 0.068 ± 0.012 luminescence/min, whereas, in sis‐expressing cells, the degradation of cAMP fit a linear zero‐order model with a slope of −0.012 ± 0.0012 luminescence/min. As there is 10 μM of isoproterenol present, we hypothesized that the receptor is nearly always active, and sis has altered kinetics and GRK activity due to rapid cycling between the cyclase and receptor. To test this second hypothesis, exploratory experiments are being conducted to determine if the alterations observed can be explained through a chimerically‐derived interaction with RGS proteins. The collected preliminary data suggest that altered kinetics of signaling alter GRK function and receptor internalization, and consequently, RGS proteins may indirectly inhibit GRK function.Support or Funding InformationWesternU MSPS program funds and NIH grants DK073911 (MB), DK079307 (EKJ), and HL109002 (EKJ) supported this work.