Congress rejects Trump's historic science cuts

Overview

For 80 years, federal science funding enjoyed bipartisan protection. President Trump's fiscal year 2026 budget proposed ending that consensus, calling for cuts of 57% to the National Science Foundation (NSF), 47% to NASA's science programs, and 40% to the National Institutes of Health (NIH). Congress said no. On January 30, 2026, Trump signed a spending bill that preserves most science agency budgets—passed by votes of 397-28 in the House and 82-15 in the Senate.

The gap between what the president requested and what Congress appropriated represents one of the largest executive-legislative divergences on science policy in modern history. NSF received $8.75 billion instead of the proposed $3.9 billion. NASA science got $7.25 billion rather than $3.9 billion. The Department of Energy's Office of Science received an increase to $8.4 billion. Combined with supplemental funding from the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, NASA's total budget of $27.53 billion is its largest since 1998 in inflation-adjusted terms.

Play on this story Voices Debate Who Said What? Predict

Key Indicators

$8.75B

NSF Budget (FY2026)

3.4% cut from FY2025, versus the proposed 57% reduction to $3.9B

$27.53B

Total NASA Budget (FY2026)

Largest since FY1998 in inflation-adjusted terms, combining appropriations and reconciliation funding

82-15

Senate Vote

Bipartisan supermajority passed the funding package, with 82 senators supporting

7,800+

Research Grants Disrupted (2025)

Grants canceled or suspended during 2025, totaling nearly $1.4B in lost funding

Interactive

Exploring all sides of a story is often best achieved with Play.

Ever wondered what historical figures would say about today's headlines?

People Involved

Susan Collins

Led bipartisan negotiations on science funding package

Patty Murray

Led Democratic negotiations on science funding

Tom Cole

Led House passage of FY2026 appropriations bills

Organizations Involved

National Science Foundation

Federal Agency

Received $8.75B for FY2026, avoiding proposed 57% cut

Independent federal agency funding approximately 25% of all federally supported basic research at U.S. colleges and universities.

National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)

Federal Agency

Received $24.44B in appropriations plus $10B supplemental from One Big Beautiful Bill Act

Federal agency responsible for U.S. civil space program, aeronautics research, and space science.

Department of Energy Office of Science

Federal Funding Agency

Received $8.4B for FY2026, a 2% increase despite proposed cuts

Largest federal sponsor of basic research in physical sciences, operating 17 national laboratories.

National Institutes of Health

Federal Agency

Appropriations bill provides $48.7B, a $415M increase over FY2025

World's largest public funder of biomedical research, comprising 27 institutes and centers.

Timeline

Trump Signs Science Funding Bill
Legislation

President Trump signs H.R. 6938 into law, enacting science agency budgets that largely preserve funding despite his proposed cuts. The White House had indicated senior advisors would recommend signing.
January 30th, 2026
Senate Passes Funding Package 82-15
Legislation

Senate approves the minibus with overwhelming bipartisan support. NSF receives $8.75B (vs. $3.9B proposed), NASA $24.44B, and DOE Office of Science $8.4B (a 2% increase).
January 15th, 2026
House Passes Science Funding Minibus 397-28
Legislation

The House passes H.R. 6938, a three-bill package funding Commerce, Justice, Science; Energy and Water; and Interior agencies for FY2026. Only 28 members vote against.
January 8th, 2026
Shutdown Ends After 43 Days
Budget Crisis

Trump signs bill ending the record-setting shutdown. NIH receives temporary funding through January 30, 2026. During the shutdown, 75% of NIH staff were furloughed and no new grants were issued.
November 12th, 2025
Government Shutdown Begins
Budget Crisis

Federal government shuts down as Congress fails to pass appropriations bills. The shutdown, driven by disputes over healthcare tax credits, will last 43 days—the longest in U.S. history.
October 1st, 2025
Congress Releases Appropriations Bills Rejecting Trump Cuts
Legislation

House and Senate appropriations committees release FY2026 bills that largely preserve science agency budgets, ignoring the administration's proposed reductions.
September 2025
One Big Beautiful Bill Act Signed
Legislation

Trump signs reconciliation bill including $10 billion for NASA programs over six years—funding for Artemis, the International Space Station, and other priorities the administration had proposed cutting.
July 4th, 2025
Court Strikes Down NSF Indirect Cost Cap
Legal

Federal Judge Indira Talwani rules NSF's 15% cap is "arbitrary and capricious" and violates federal law. Courts have now blocked indirect cost caps at all four agencies that imposed them.
June 20th, 2025
Trump Releases FY2026 Budget Proposal
Budget

Administration proposes cutting NSF by 57% (to $3.9B), NASA science by 47% (to $3.9B), NIH by 40% (to $27.5B), and DOE Office of Science by 14%. Scientists and universities describe the proposal as an existential threat.
May 30th, 2025
NSF Caps Indirect Cost Rates at 15%
Policy Change

NSF announces it will reimburse universities only 15% for indirect costs, down from typical negotiated rates of 50-65%. Universities sue, arguing the cap is arbitrary and violates federal law.
May 5th, 2025
DOGE Suspends Research Grants
Administration Action

DOGE begins suspending and canceling grants at NIH and NSF. Over the course of 2025, more than 7,800 grants are disrupted, with 2,600 ultimately terminated representing nearly $1.4 billion in lost funding.
February 2025
Trump Inaugurated, DOGE Begins Agency Reviews
Administration Action

President Trump's second term begins. The Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) starts reviewing federal contracts and grants across science agencies.
January 20th, 2025

Scenarios

Predict which scenario wins. Contrarian picks score more — points lock in when the scenario resolves.

Predictions leaderboard

FY2027 Brings Renewed Budget Battle

The administration may propose similar or deeper cuts in its FY2027 budget request, forcing another congressional showdown. However, with the bipartisan coalition that delivered 82-15 and 397-28 margins still intact, major cuts remain unlikely to survive the legislative process. The precedent of rejecting executive overreach on science funding is now firmly established.

Discussed by: Science policy analysts at AAAS, AIP, and Nature

Consensus —

Administrative Actions Erode Funding Despite Congressional Appropriations

Even with appropriations secured, the administration could continue disrupting research through grant freezes, contract cancellations, and policy changes like indirect cost caps—tactics employed throughout 2025. Courts have blocked many such actions, but new approaches may emerge. Over 25,000 federal science workers left agencies in 2025, and workforce attrition could limit agencies' capacity to spend appropriated funds.

Discussed by: Higher education associations, Nature, and STAT News

Consensus —

CHIPS and Science Authorization Renewed or Expanded

The CHIPS and Science Act authorized $81 billion for NSF through FY2027, but actual appropriations have fallen 42% short of authorized levels. Congress could use the FY2026 outcome as momentum to close this gap in future years, particularly as semiconductor competition with China intensifies. Full appropriation to authorized levels would double NSF's budget.

Discussed by: Congressional Research Service, bipartisan technology policy groups

Consensus —

Sustained Bipartisan Consensus Shields Science Through 2028

The overwhelming margins in both chambers suggest science funding has become politically untouchable for most members of Congress. If this coalition holds through the 2026 midterms, science agencies could see stable or growing budgets regardless of executive branch proposals, returning to the 80-year pattern of bipartisan protection that existed before this administration's budget request.

Discussed by: Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, science advocacy organizations

Consensus —

Historical Context

Gingrich Congress Budget Battles (1995-1996)

November 1995 - January 1996

What Happened

After Republicans took control of Congress in 1994, Speaker Newt Gingrich pushed for deep spending cuts including elimination of the Office of Technology Assessment and reductions to NASA and NSF. President Clinton vetoed the spending bill, triggering two government shutdowns totaling 27 days. The standoff ended with Congress largely accepting Clinton's budget.

Outcome

Short Term

Republicans abandoned most proposed science cuts. The Office of Technology Assessment was eliminated, but NASA and NSF budgets were preserved. Public polling blamed Republicans for the shutdown.

Long Term

Gingrich later became an advocate for doubling research spending. The episode established that shutdowns carry political costs for the party perceived as causing them.

Why It's Relevant Today

Like in 1995, a president signed spending bills that rejected his party's proposed science cuts after a lengthy shutdown. Both cases demonstrated that bipartisan support for federal research can override executive preferences.

Post-World War II Research Establishment (1945-1950)

1945 - 1950

What Happened

Vannevar Bush's report "Science—The Endless Frontier" proposed federal funding for basic research, leading to creation of the National Science Foundation in 1950. Senator Harley Kilgore and Bush debated whether scientists or elected officials should control research priorities. The compromise created an independent agency with presidential appointment of leadership.

Outcome

Short Term

NSF was established with a $3.5 million first-year budget. The Atomic Energy Commission and NIH were expanded, creating the modern federal research enterprise.

Long Term

For 80 years, federal science funding enjoyed bipartisan growth through Democratic and Republican administrations alike, becoming what analysts call the foundation of American technological leadership.

Why It's Relevant Today

The Trump administration's proposed cuts represented the first serious challenge to this 80-year consensus. Congress's bipartisan rejection reaffirmed the post-war compact that federal research investment transcends partisan politics.

Reagan-Era Defense vs. Civilian Research (1981-1989)

1981 - 1989

What Happened

President Reagan prioritized defense research and the Strategic Defense Initiative ("Star Wars") while proposing cuts to civilian science. Congress consistently restored funding for NSF, NIH, and other agencies. Reagan's science advisor George Keyworth established the White House Science Council to provide bipartisan input on research priorities.

Outcome

Short Term

Civilian research budgets held steady despite proposed cuts. Defense R&D grew significantly.

Long Term

The pattern of executive proposals and congressional restoration became routine. NIH budget doubled between 1998-2003 with bipartisan support.

Why It's Relevant Today

The Reagan precedent showed that presidents can propose science cuts but Congress typically restores them. The 2026 outcome follows this pattern but at unprecedented scale—the gap between proposed and enacted funding was larger than in any Reagan-era budget.