{"id":76337,"date":"2026-01-11T00:01:00","date_gmt":"2026-01-11T07:01:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.opinionpublica.tv\/portada\/?p=76337"},"modified":"2026-01-10T21:09:38","modified_gmt":"2026-01-11T04:09:38","slug":"congress-is-reversing-trumps-steep-budget-cuts-to-science","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.opinionpublica.tv\/portada\/congress-is-reversing-trumps-steep-budget-cuts-to-science\/","title":{"rendered":"Congress is reversing Trump\u2019s steep budget cuts to science"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\"Congress<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Washington, USA<\/em>.- Congress is racing to undo thousands of cuts to federal science programs that President Trump called for last year when planning the government\u2019s current budget.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

If enacted, the president\u2019s bid for an overall cut in scientific funding to $154 billion from $198 billion \u2014 a plunge of 22 percent \u2014 would have been the largest reduction in federal spending on science since World War II, when Washington and the seekers of nature\u2019s secrets began their partnership.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This week, the Senate Appropriations Committee released a bipartisan package of bills that largely scraps Mr. Trump\u2019s planned cuts. Analysts say that, if the proposed budgets hold up in the weeks ahead, Congress will set aside roughly $188 billion for federal research \u2014 a drop of about 4 percent from the most recent annual budget.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cThat\u2019s pretty solid,\u201d said Alessandra Zimmermann, a budget analyst at the American Association for the Advancement of Science, a scientific group based in Washington. \u201cCongress is really starting to push back.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Surprisingly, analysts foresee a possible rise of more than 2 percent in the budget category known as basic research \u2014 the blue-sky variety that produces fundamental strides and spinoffs in fields such as health care and artificial intelligence. Last year, the Trump administration called for a cut in federal basic research of more than one-third.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Mr. Trump sought even larger cuts for the National Science Foundation, which sponsors much of the nation\u2019s basic research. He proposed that its budget be slashed to $3.9 billion from $8.8 billion, a drop of 56 percent. The Senate package countered with a reduction to $8.75 billion, or less than 1 percent.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The bipartisan accord on funding science, Ms. Zimmermann said, stands in sharp contrast with the congressional impasse that shut down the government last fall as Democrats and Republicans clashed over the renewal of subsidies for the Affordable Care Act.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cThey\u2019re working together now,\u201d she said. \u201cIt\u2019s a return to normalcy.\u201d The new cooperation, Ms. Zimmermann added, is \u201cpromising for the eventual passage of the bills.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Each year, the president submits a budget request to Congress in advance of the annual appropriations process. Only Congress has the power of the purse.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In a statement, Senator Patty Murray of Washington State, the top Democrat on the Senate Appropriations Committee, praised the package of bills as good not only for investigating nature but also for enhancing public safety and the welfare of American families.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cDemocrats fought to protect investments that matter,\u201d she said. The package, she added, \u201crejects President Trump\u2019s push to let our competitors do laps around us.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Senator Susan Collins, Republican of Maine and chairwoman of the Appropriations Committee, called the package \u201ca fiscally responsible\u201d move that will \u201cspur scientific research necessary to maintain U.S. competitiveness.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Senate package includes $24.4 billion for NASA (a 1.6 percent cut), $8.8 billion for the Environmental Protection Agency (a 4 percent cut), $8.4 billion for the Department of Energy Office of Science (a 1.9 percent increase), $6.2 billion for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (roughly flat), $1.4 billion for the U.S. Geological Survey (a 2 percent cut) and $1.2 billion for the National Institute of Standards and Technology (a 2.3 percent increase).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In New York City, the package would aid scientists displaced by the closure of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies, which was famously located upstairs from Tom\u2019s Restaurant at Broadway and West 112th Street, near Columbia University. The diner\u2019s facade appears in \u201cSeinfeld\u201d episodes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

On Thursday, the House voted to approve the Senate package. Many federal programs have recently had their budgets frozen at last year\u2019s levels. Congress, eager to avoid another shutdown, is working to pass spending bills before stopgap measures expire on Jan. 30.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

So far, the House\u2019s moves on this year\u2019s science budgeting add up to an estimated total of $185 billion \u2014 close to the Senate figure of $188 billion, and putting the two chambers not far apart for negotiations on a final budget.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The improved budgetary picture cannot undo the damage that the Trump administration\u2019s frenzy of budget cutting and administrative chaos brought to the nation\u2019s scientific establishment, analysts say. They see the cycles of cuts and reinstatements as taking a toll that in some cases may require years to mend.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Analysts also note that the administration has made policy shifts on how appropriated funds are spent. For instance, the National Institutes of Health, which traditionally hedged its scientific bets by supporting a wide range of investigators, is now dividing its annual budget into fewer projects.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Even so, science advocates are breathing sighs of relief now that Congress is re-embracing the status quo that in the last century powered the nation\u2019s rise and now maintains its status as the world leader in scientific discovery.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cScience is doing OK,\u201d Ms. Zimmermann, of the science association, said. \u201cThings are not bad at all, given our expectations.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n