Trump’s Budget Would Dismantle American Science
And it will be hard to build it back
The Trump administration unveiled its proposed budget for fiscal year 2026—and with it, a blueprint to dismantle the nation’s scientific infrastructure. The numbers are jaw-dropping: a 37% cut to the National Institutes of Health (NIH), more than 50% cut to the National Science Foundation (NSF), and over half of NASA’s science budget on the chopping block. Funding for climate and environmental research? Virtually erased.
This isn’t budget tightening, it is dismantling the US scientific enterprise as we know it. And this time, Congress might not stop it.
A Scientific System on the Brink
NIH, the nation’s leading medical research agency, would face a $18 billion reduction. The administration doesn’t just propose slashing funds; it seeks to radically restructure the agency, eliminating institutes that support minority health, international collaboration, and complementary medicine. Science would no longer be shaped by public health needs, but by political ideology.
NSF, celebrating its 75th year, would see its $9 billion budget halved. Critical funding for environmental research and science education initiatives face deep cuts, and programs that support diversity in STEM would be, essentially, eliminated. Only politically favored technologies like artificial intelligence and quantum computing would be spared.
NASA’s science programs also would be gutted. Flagship missions like the Mars Sample Return and climate monitoring satellites would be scrapped. NOAA would lose nearly all funding for climate and weather research. The CDC, DOE, EPA—each would face crippling reductions, cutting into the agencies responsible for protecting health, the environment, and energy security.
The Consequences Will Ripple Far Beyond Washington
This budget doesn’t just threaten federal scientists—it puts the entire American research enterprise at risk.
University labs across the country depend on NIH and NSF funding to operate. Graduate students rely on these grants to launch their careers. Entire research centers will be forced to shut down, leaving thousands of highly trained researchers without jobs—and with little incentive to stay in a country that’s actively defunding their work.
The U.S. has long attracted and retained top scientific talent. If this budget becomes law, we won’t just lose money, we’ll lose minds. And other nations, eager to invest in innovation, will be ready to welcome them. They already are – Europe announced a $566 million investment to “make Europe a magnet for researchers.”
The Damage Won’t Be Temporary
The deepest tragedy of these proposed cuts is that, if Congress passes them, they cannot be quickly undone.
Research infrastructure takes years—often decades—to build. When labs shut down and teams disperse, momentum is lost. Experiments are abandoned. Collaborations fracture. Equipment deteriorates. Graduate students drop out. Talented researchers move abroad or leave science altogether.
Even if a future administration restores funding, rebuilding will take time, trust, and a level of investment that may not be politically or logistically feasible. In many fields, we may simply not recover what is lost.
This isn’t just a pause, it’s a rupture. And ruptures are hard to heal.
Congress Has Blocked Deep Cuts to Science Before—But Will It Now?
In previous years, Congress has served as a bulwark against extreme science cuts. Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle have traditionally understood that research funding is a strategic investment in the nation’s health, economy, and security.
But this Congress is different.
Time and again, Republican leadership has shown a willingness to defer to Trump—even when it means turning against long-standing bipartisan priorities. Even when it means defending the administration’s illegal actions. Science could be next. And if the current Congress stays silent, the deep cuts the Trump administration is pushing could become reality.
This Isn’t About Saving Money. It’s About Controlling Science.
The administration frames this as a reprioritization. But make no mistake: this is an attempt to control what science gets done, and who gets to do it.
Research on climate change, health equity, environmental protection, and global health—fields that often challenge political narratives—would be defunded. In their place: a stripped-down, ideologically compliant research agenda tailored to serve political allies and economic interests.
This isn’t fiscal conservatism. It’s censorship by budget.
What Happens Next Is Up to Us
If you’re a scientist, educator, student, university leader, patient advocate, or simply someone who believes that using science to search for truth should matter in public life—now is the time to act. Congress must hear that these cuts are unacceptable. Our institutions must speak out. The public must get loud.
Because once we lose capacity, we don’t get it back easily. Once our talent leaves, it may not return. Once we cede global leadership in science, we may never reclaim it.
The stakes are clear. The time to defend science is now.
Thiel's arguments are largely about university research, much of which I agree with.
Jacob Carter's concerns are about USG research. I went through this in the early 80's when I was a science center director with NOAA and President Reagan tackled reducing government spending right after President Carter introduced the then-dreaded Senior Executive Service in Civil Service. The big budget numbers above are difficult to analyze w/o details of what's in and out. One thing is curious, though, of all the major agencies NOAA has a relatively small cut and it conducts the primary science behind climate change.
I think you need to debate Peter Thiel.
https://x.com/i/grok/share/5fqwIEyHsWmldUFfP2lpTCqPH