Trump's budget proposal slashes science funding, threatening the US research enterprise

In late May, President Trump released new details for his fiscal year 2026 budget request, proposing unprecedented cuts to federal science agencies that have long enjoyed strong bipartisan support.

The proposal — which expands on topline numbers released earlier in the month — calls for reducing the National Science Foundation's budget by 57%, the National Institutes of Health’s budget by roughly 40%, and NASA's science budget by 47%. The Department of Energy's Office of Science faces a 14% cut, while the National Institute of Standards and Technology would see a 28% reduction.

These cuts target institutions that have spurred American scientific and technological leadership for decades. Since World War II, federal investment in scientific research has maintained strong bipartisan backing, with both Republican and Democratic administrations recognizing its critical importance to national competitiveness.

While presidential budget proposals require congressional approval, even partial implementation of these cuts could irreversibly damage America's scientific enterprise at a time when other global leaders in science and technology are expanding their research investments.

In an APS survey of physicists, respondents detailed the profound impacts their federally funded research has had. “I have directly led the development of pharmaceutical products to treat drug-resistant bacterial infections that would not be possible using private funds,” wrote a physicist who received funding from two funding agencies. “Patients have received treatments for infections that were previously incurable, due to the backing of the U.S. federal government.”

Respondents also pointed out that federal funding for their basic research has fueled workforce development and local economic activity. A neutrino physicist wrote that their federal research funding supported training for students who went on to work in industries like cloud computing, sensors, and finance. “Students that I train pick up general STEM skills that they can then apply in areas beyond basic science research,” they added.

Another physicist, who studied optics and now develops medical imaging technology in the private sector, wrote, “The federal funding that supported me through my Ph.D. allowed me to become an expert in computational imaging and ultrafast lasers.”

Another physicist wrote, "NSF funding has allowed me to train numerous doctoral students, all of whom have gone on to pursue careers in the semiconductor industry."

Polling shows widespread public support for science funding across party lines. According to a January 2023 survey by Research!America, more than 3 in 4 Americans say investing in research is creating employment opportunities in the U.S. — and more than 8 in 10 Americans agree basic research should be supported by the federal government.

The proposed cuts would have profound economic consequences. A study by American University's Institute for Macroeconomic and Policy Analysis finds that a 25% reduction in public research funding would decrease GDP by 3.8% over the next few decades — comparable to the decline of the Great Recession. A 50% cut would reduce GDP by 7.6%, a drop greater than any since the great Depression. This level of disinvestment could permanently chill American economic productivity.

Physicists nationwide are already experiencing impacts from earlier funding freezes and grant terminations. “An effective hiring freeze has been imposed,” one national laboratory physicist wrote in the APS survey. “Contingency plans are being drawn for reductions in the workforce.”

Programs supporting young STEM students have been affected, too. “We have had to cancel a summer program for undergraduate math majors,” wrote one scientist. “This program was designed to prepare students for grad school and targeted students from underserved colleges and universities.”

Small businesses are also being slammed. One respondent, a scientist at an instrument manufacturer, forecasted an alarming drop in sales if the cuts are realized. “We will then have to make the difficult decision to reduce the local workforce,” the respondent wrote.

The president’s budget would also eliminate entire research programs, including NASA's Office of STEM. And as of February, NSF has awarded only 52 REU (Research Experiences for Undergraduates) grants in 2025, compared to about 200 annually since 2015, according to Science — a trend that APS members are witnessing firsthand. “If NSF REUs are no longer able to run, fewer undergraduates will have access to in-lab experience, creating a generation of physicists unprepared for the workforce,” wrote one physics student.

Meanwhile, America's main scientific and technological rivals are rising fast. In terms of federal R&D funding as a percentage of GDP, U.S. investment has dropped for decades, and the gap that once existed between the U.S. and China's R&D expenditure has largely been erased.

APS is mobilizing opposition through a 50-state advocacy campaign, with a focus on Alaska, Alabama, Indiana, Kansas, Maine, Pennsylvania, South Dakota, Tennessee, and West Virginia. The organization is building teams to meet with Senate staff and share stories of how cuts impact local communities — a nonpartisan issue. As Francis Slakey, the chief external affairs officer for APS, emphasized in a recent town hall, “We’ll continue to stand by our values and fight with our members to protect federal science funding and the U.S. scientific enterprise.”

APS is taking other action on Capitol Hill and in the courts. On March 11, the organization filed an amicus brief in support of federal agency staff who recently lost their jobs. And this month, attendees have written more than 7,000 letters to their representatives through APS’ national campaign. “We’re proud of the APS community for mobilizing to speak out during this critical moment for science,” said APS CEO Jonathan Bagger.

And as APS President John Doyle emphasized in the town hall, “By supporting curiosity-driven basic research with an eye towards future applications — whether scientific or commercial — we ensure that science continues to advance knowledge and drive the innovation needed to build a better future for our global society.”

APS encourages members to contact their congressional representatives and share how funding cuts affect their research. Visit APS in Action to learn more about the organization’s advocacy efforts and ways to get involved.

This article was updated on June 11, 2025.