Amid sweeping federal budget cuts, the Trump administration has begun to downsize the National Science Foundation and the National Institutes of Health. Though cuts have yet to take effect, the NSF has paused certain grants and the NIH has reduced the cap on indirect research costs. In turn, Trinity students face disrupted post-graduate plans, while professors question the future of their research projects.
As the NSF and NIH undergo sweeping administrative changes, Executive Order 14151, “Ending Radical And Wasteful Government DEI Programs And Preferencing,” has sparked widespread concern across academic institutions. President Trump’s rationale for cuts — efficiency concerns — caused skepticism within the scientific community at Trinity.
Nirav Mehta, professor of physics and astronomy, said he is currently developing a theory to describe how neutral atoms collide with trapped ions, a key process in hybrid systems for quantum computing. He recently applied for a grant to fund this research and has been met with challenges since Trump announced the cuts.
“We submitted that proposal, and it was reviewed well. We were expecting an award any time, and then the chaos in January ensued, and we still have no award,” Mehta said.
According to Mehta, the uncertainty has been compounded by workforce reductions at the NSF. The program officer overseeing his division was laid off, which has further complicated the process of moving forward with his grant. Mehta said that past the immediate setbacks presented by NSF cuts, there could be long-term implications on research and development in the U.S. Notably, Mehta said that the money previously dedicated to public research could be diverted to private industries, which may prioritize proprietary gain over public accessibility.
“If the NSF sees more massive cuts, universities will not be able to take on graduate students. If you can’t hire a graduate student, your lab at a research university is not going to function,” Mehta said. “Investing in fundamental science is exactly that: an investment, and investments pay off in the future.”
Christina Cooley, professor of chemistry, is already witnessing this phenomenon among her senior students. Cooley said that one of her students, a senior biochemistry and molecular biology major, had secured a post-baccalaureate research position at the NIH, only to have the program canceled.
“I have three students applying to Ph.D. programs, and at least three schools — University of Pittsburgh, Vanderbilt and USC — have said they’re pausing all graduate recruiting programs,” Cooley said. “It’s taking away opportunities for seniors.”
Cooley said that limiting research funding is an ineffective way for development. She cited historical examples such as Ozempic, a medication developed through research on Gila monsters.
“I think we need to do a better job as scientists, helping to explain to everyone that all these things that you use every day — driving in cars, flying in airplanes, electricity — all of that stuff is science,” Cooley said.
For Amy Stone, professor of sociology and anthropology, the impending cuts could likely end key research projects. They recently received a grant to develop an adverse child experiences scale for LGBTQ+ children. Senator Ted Cruz included this project in his database of NSF grants that he claims are “questionable projects that promoted Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion or advanced neo-Marxist class warfare propaganda.”
“I’ve seen my name and my grants on the list,” Stone said. “I’m just holding steady, continuing my work and staying in touch with my program officers at the NSF and NIH.”
Just as ‘efficiency’ policies may hinder technological development, Stone suggested that the proposed restrictions could also reshape sociological work.
“If sociological work and other branches of science have to preclude considerations like gender and sexuality, it’s a huge step back,” Stone said. “It’s a real shame to potentially rescind grant calls or work on LGBTQ health.”
David Ribble, dean of the D. R. Semmes School of Science, agreed that scientists need to prioritize advocacy for their works, but said he believes these cuts won’t have a lasting effect on Trinity.
“None of these cuts have happened yet. Faculty are still applying for grants, and funding agencies like the NSF are doing the best job they can right now,” Ribble said. “Congress determines how we as a nation spend money. I think their authority will remain, and ultimately, they will prevail.”
