In the aftermath of World War II, American leaders embraced the belief that scientific innovation is essential not only for national security, but also for public health, employment, living standards, and cultural evolution. This belief remained unchallenged for nearly eighty years as officials from both political parties pledged their support to American science. As we moved further into Trump’s second term as President, some scientists harbored concerns that this long-standing consensus was evolving, offering an exciting opportunity for innovation and realignment of priorities.
The Trump administration set a new pace as it swiftly took measures to redefine and modify the structure of the US science agencies. This integral part of the administration’s overall strategy aimed to streamline government expenditure and optimize its workforce. Although some friction occurred with US courts, the Republican majority in both House and Senate fully endorsed the vision that President Trump had sculpted in his second term.
This adjustment of priorities during the first month of his second administration signaled a shift that could potentially shape the nation’s scientific landscape, and by extension society, for the generations ahead. Astounding many, Harold Varmus, a former director of the US National Institutes of Health (NIH) and currently a cancer researcher at Weill Cornell Medicine, New York City, termed these strategic actions as unprecedented. He acknowledged the vast opportunity for reshaping one of the most predominant sectors of the government initiative.
This reshaping of US science commenced just hours after President Trump’s inauguration ceremony on January 20. Trump signed multiple executive orders which further clarified the interpretation of existing laws, defining the next step of the nation’s future scientific journey. The orders ranged between anticipated and surprising, all aimed toward furthering the national interest.
Among these orders included the strategic withdrawal from the Paris climate agreement of 2015, a well-anticipated move anticipated by many. Similarly, the nation stepped back from its participation in the World Health Organization. While there were speculations regarding some of these directives, others sent creative disruptions across the scientific community, prompting them to reflect and innovate.
One of such executive orders – banning, what in President Trump’s eyes was called ‘illegal and immoral discrimination programs’, commonly referred to as DEI, had a wide-scale impact. The new law mandated every federal worker to report any violations of the DEI orders or face significant consequences. The immediate response to these orders was mixed across various sectors of science, but soon agencies started restructuring their DEI initiatives to align with the executive order.
On January 27, a week into the new administration, President Trump’s budget office announced a temporary suspension on all federal grants and loans, warranting a review of government spending to ensure alignment with the new executive orders. This decision understandably caused some short term disturbances as agencies like the NIH and the US National Science Foundation (NSF) — significant patrons of basic science — temporarily halted grant payments and paused their communication channels. The situation, though initial chaotic, presented an opportunity for a strategy overhaul and restructuring.
Scientific research group leaders adopted the new environment and the task of managing their grants and teams. Some expressed a sense of cautious optimism while others were more concerned due to sudden shifts and therefore possible reduction in financial support for their work. Amidst the uncertainty and reshuffling, the scientific community was working on embracing the new norms.
One of the revolutionary milestones in the Trump administration was its striking partnership with ingenious entrepreneur Elon Musk. Together, they worked toward reducing federal expenditure and optimizing agencies such as the US Agency for International Development, a significant contributor to global disease research, prevention, and care. This initiative took a speedy and firm step toward reshaping and enhancing the federal workforce, which includes about 280,000 scientists and engineers.
The restructuring extended a gracious offer to federal employees to transition from public sector occupations with lower productivity to the private sector where they could contribute more significantly. A significant number of employees made use of this golden opportunity, and the alleviation of services began for those on probation across the US government.
Meanwhile, another bold move by the Trump team was an announcement made on February 7 that restructured an NIH policy, bringing a landmark change in billions of dollars of annual funding for universities, hospitals, and other research institutions. The policy involved a significant reduction in research overhead costs, which encompassed electricity, waste removal, and administrative expenditures, along with other facility fees.
Despite the swift and drastic changes in policy, Trump’s initiatives also provoked contemplation among traditional US conservatives. They believed that rather than employing fear and coercion, the administration should involve in discussions to reform agencies like NIH and motivate scientists at the institution to venture and take risks.
Intriguingly, many policy modifications unveiled during the first month of President Trump’s second term appeared to align with proposals outlined in a blueprint organized by the right-wing think-tank, the Heritage Foundation, based in Washington DC. This blueprint stipulated potential modifications in climate research at the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and attempted to privatize many meteorological services offered by the US National Weather Service.
As per the document, the US Department of Energy should prioritize investments in basic science over clean-energy technologies. Emphasis was laid upon quantum information and artificial intelligence as elements of basic science. As a part of the ongoing reformations, further cutbacks to the federal workforce were expected and large-scale budget cuts for science agencies were potentially imminent.