NSF funding faces 55% cut, alarming university researchers

The Trump administration‘s proposal to slash National Science Foundation funding by 55% threatens America’s global research leadership position, jeopardizing both scientific advancement and economic competitiveness. This dramatic restructuring of the $9 billion agency would reduce its budget to approximately $4 billion while narrowing research focus to five presidential priorities: AI, quantum science, biotechnology, nuclear energy, and translational science. The proposed cuts arrive amid an ongoing restructuring that has already frozen grants, particularly those related to diversity initiatives, and begun staff reductions.

The big picture: The White House seeks to dramatically refocus federal research spending despite warnings from scientists and lawmakers that such cuts could undermine America’s scientific infrastructure and competitive edge.

• President Trump has proposed slashing the NSF budget by 55% and the National Institutes of Health funding by 40%, with new NSF cuts taking effect in October.
• The administration has directed the remaining NSF resources toward five presidential research priorities: artificial intelligence, quantum information science, biotechnology, nuclear energy, and translational science.

Economic implications: Researchers warn the proposed cuts could significantly harm the U.S. economy and innovation ecosystem.

• A University of Georgia study cited in Forbes suggests these cuts would ultimately cost the American economy $10 billion annually in unrealized gains.
• The administration’s science advisor Michael Kratsios argues that increased research spending over the past 40 years hasn’t delivered proportional returns, stating that “spending more money on the wrong things is far worse than spending less money on the right things.”

What they’re saying: Senator Maria Cantwell and scientific experts pushed back against the administration’s justification for the cuts during a Monday roundtable discussion.

• University of Maryland’s Dr. Dean Chang noted that groundbreaking research often isn’t immediately recognized as valuable, citing the Nobel Prize-winning mRNA vaccine developer who “was judged to not be doing any kind of useful research for many years.”
• Washington State University’s Ananth Kalyanaraman warned the cuts would “directly undercut this vital work and also our nation’s ability to remain globally competitive” particularly in developing “the much needed next generation of AI-ready graduates.”
• Former NSF Director Francis Cordova emphasized that “arguably the most important investment NSF makes is in the workforce training of STEM talent,” which she linked directly to American economic security and standard of living.

Behind the numbers: The NSF has already begun implementing significant organizational changes in anticipation of the potential cuts.

• The agency plans to reduce academic researchers guiding funding decisions from 368 to just 70 by June 9.
• All NSF grants were frozen in April for review, with more than 1,500 grants worth over $1 billion facing potential termination.
• An unspecified number of the agency’s 1,700 employees will be laid off as part of the restructuring.

Counterpoints: The administration has particularly targeted diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives in science funding.

• Kratsios controversially claimed that “DEI initiatives, in particular, degrade our scientific enterprise” and represent “an existential threat to the real diversity of thought that forms the foundation of the scientific community.”