In March of this year, Congress cut the National Science Foundation’s (NSF) budget by over $800 million USD for the rest of fiscal year 2024 (FY24). In FY23, the NSF was allotted $9.89 billion. For FY24, the budget cut resulted in a total appropriation of $9.06 billion. Many scientists have advocated against this budget cut, fearing America’s status as an R&D superpower is on the decline. The main country of comparison is China, whose R&D spending has rapidly increased. According to this article in Nature, the share of Chinese-published papers in top academic journals overtook the US in 2020. While the US still has a lead in papers published in the biological sciences, it has been decreasing for the past few years. In other fields, such as chemistry and materials science, China has been the dominant paper publisher.
Likely fearful of this trend, President Biden signed the CHIPS and Science Act in August 2022, pushing the incentivizing regrowth in the US semiconductor industry and pushing the NSF’s involvement in science education. The act created a new arm in the NSF: the Technology, Innovation, and Partnerships Directorate. Aimed at supporting community colleges–who play a major role in developing America’s STEM workforce–the NSF created many new programs that invest in education in emerging technological fields. The act also promised to double the NSF’s allotment to $18.9 billion by 2027. Furthermore, Congress passed a bill budgeting $9.54 billion for the NSF for FY23 in December 2022. On top of that, Biden signed an omnibus appropriation and the Disaster Relief Supplemental, totaling the NSF’s final balance to the $9.89 billion.
Perhaps as a response to the NSF’s rapid budget growth, the cut to $9.06 billion for FY24 was passed in a series of congressional movements that have reduced the overall budget for many scientific agencies. Underfunding the NSF risks losing the advancements made in STEM education through the CHIPS act–stunting the younger generation’s ability to enter technological industries. Considering the election results and Trump’s pledge for deficit government spending, the NSF faces even more budget reductions. Beyond the NSF, other agencies such as the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) have also received cuts for FY24. The EPA received a major cut overall while the NOAA and NASA budgets have actually increased. The concern in the two budget growths lie in their allotments: the NOAA’s primary research arm and NASA’s planetary science programs were both slashed.
While it is difficult to conclude whether or not America’s grip as a science superpower is loosening, this year’s cuts set a dark outlook for science in FY25. FY25 appropriation decisions will not be realized until March of next year. The NSF has submitted a request for $10.18 billion, a moderate increase of 3% from the appropriated amount in FY23. As an aspiring researcher who will likely rely on NSF funding grants, the future of primary research in the US does not seem so bright. The red trinity of the Senate, House, and the Executive office set a worrying prospect for government-funded American R&D. As the younger generation, it is our job to properly communicate science to our political body to promote proper spending to support our country’s future in research and medicine.
I encourage you to read this article in Science if you are interested in further information.
