Eight years ago, I wrote about how the focus on applied research was obscuring the importance of basic research.[1] I lamented the fact that, in the United States, the Federal Government was spending less and less on basic research. What prompted my concern was an article by journalist Jeffrey Mervis who reported, “For the first time in the post–World War II era, the federal government no longer funds a majority of the basic research carried out in the United States. Data from ongoing surveys by the National Science Foundation (NSF) show that federal agencies provided only 44% of the $86 billion spent on basic research in 2015. The federal share, which topped 70% throughout the 1960s and ’70s, stood at 61% as recently as 2004 before falling below 50% in 2013.”[2] The percentage continues to fall. Last year it was estimated that federal funding provided around 40% of the funding spent on basic research. Should we care? Studies have shown that research and development (R&D) is an important driver of economic growth. It is also essential for national security.

Back in the late 1930s, Dr. Abraham Flexner, the first Director of the Institute for Advanced Study, argued that curious people seeking answers to questions that puzzled them were (and are) the intellectual giants upon whose shoulders innovators have always stood. He called the knowledge these intellectual giants pursued “useless knowledge.” Why was this knowledge useless? Because, Flexner argued, those pursuing such knowledge had “no concern about the utility of their work” and had “no practical objective” in mind.[3] Flexner observed that practical applications are always built upon knowledge discovered by people who had little to no interest in how their research could be applied. He explained, “I am not for a moment suggesting that everything that goes on in laboratories will ultimately turn to some unexpected practical use or that an ultimate practical use is its actual justification. Much more am I pleading for the abolition of the word ‘use,’ and for the freeing of the human spirit. … To be sure, we shall thus waste some precious dollars. But what is infinitely more important is that we shall be striking the shackles off the human mind.”

What’s Happening Now?

At the moment, it appears that researchers are being shackled rather than unshackled. Freelance science writer Peter Gwynne reports, “Scientists across the US have been left reeling after a spate of executive orders from US President Donald Trump has led to research funding being slashed, staff being told to quit, and key programs being withdrawn. … The Trump administration has asked the National Science Foundation, which funds much US basic and applied research, to lay off between a quarter and a half of its staff in the next two months. Another report suggests there are plans to cut the agency’s annual budget from roughly $9bn to $3bn.”[4] As the federal government brain drain began, one NSF scientist, Heather Masson-Forsythe, explained, “Almost all of NSF’s budget is pushed out the door, put in the hands of researchers breaking scientific barriers in every sector, innovators building their local economies, and educators shepherding the next generation of scientists across the country, with impacts spanning the globe. There is nothing efficient about removing this depth of expertise from US federal service.” Journalist Sam Stein reports, “The scope of [this brain drain] impact remains largely underappreciated. Experts say it can’t be measured in weeks or months or even in government services affected. Rather, it will be felt over the span of decades and defined in metrics like intellectual talent lost.”[5]

The impact of reduced federal research funding reaches deep into academia and the future of science in America. Stein explains, “The federal government has long taken an active role in funding basic scientific research, which is financially risky and expensive but critical to discoveries that yield new technologies, including treatments and cures for diseases. Young researchers hoping to find new treatments for cancer, dementia, or other diseases may find that, with government funding curtailed, they may never get the opportunity. Areas of scientific investigation will be cut off as the Trump administration discourages or outright prohibits funding for certain fields of research.” Richard Huganir, director of the Department of Neuroscience at Johns Hopkins University, predicts a dire future if budget cuts remain in place. He stated, “I think it’s the end of science as we know it for the United States if that really goes through.”[6]

What’s Being Lost?

Technology journalist Brian Buntz notes that these developments are occurring at a critical moment in America’s history. He reports, “While the U.S. remains the world’s research superpower … China is quickly catching up and could be the world’s top R&D spender by 2030.”[7] David Deming, a professor at the Harvard Kennedy School, writes, “With its attack on research, DOGE is failing on its own terms. Cutting basic science funding violates its mandate to make government more efficient. If they survive legal challenges, the moves might save money in the short run, but in the years and decades to come, they will cost taxpayers dearly by slowing down innovation and making America’s future less prosperous.”[8] Like Flexner, Deming notes, “Many breakthrough technologies began as highly speculative, taxpayer-funded projects with no immediate practical value.” He adds, “An NSF-funded project on the chopping block today might be on track to unlock future breakthroughs in clean energy or artificial intelligence.”

“The public has a right to demand that its tax dollars are spent wisely,” Deming writes. “One good measure of the efficiency of government spending is whether it beats the alternative: returning the money to citizens as a tax cut. Funding for basic research is efficient by this very strict definition. Multiple studies have concluded that $1 spent on research typically returns several dollars of value to society through increases in private-sector innovation. … The overall picture is very consistent: Government funding of basic science research generates very large social returns, even when we can’t accurately predict the good ideas ahead of time.”

What are we losing under the current plans for budget cuts? Karl Rockne, a professor at the University of Illinois at Chicago and the former director of the NSF’s environmental engineering program, is “unsure what the future of US scientific research will look like.”[9] He says, Much of modern life would not be possible without the scientific innovation that NSF investments supported. There is no guarantee that the US will continue to lead in scientific innovation, and without innovation, talent and resources will naturally flow elsewhere. Many people in the research community supported by the program I managed … have voiced grave concern that the future of American science is at risk.”

Technology journalist Karen Hao, who specializes in covering artificial intelligence, notes that America could also lose international prestige and influence. She explains, “Ever since World War II, the US has been the global leader in science and technology — and benefited immensely from it. Research fuels American innovation and the economy in turn. Scientists around the world want to study in the US and collaborate with American scientists to produce more of that research. These international collaborations play a critical role in American soft power and diplomacy.”[10] She’s concerned these avenues of influence will soon go away. She explains, “Now the breadth and velocity of the Trump administration’s actions has led to an unprecedented assault on every pillar upholding American scientific leadership.” Brigid Cakouros, a federal scientist who was terminated from USAID, told Hao, “I have no doubt that the international science community will ultimately be okay. It’ll just be a shame for the US to isolate themselves from it.”

Concluding Thoughts

Deming notes, “Scientific discovery is unpredictable and haphazard, with many surprises and dead ends.” But scientific discovery is also essential for innovation, economic growth, and national security. The Computing Research Association insists that current budget cuts are “a shortsighted move that will undermine American innovation and technological leadership and decrease our competitiveness and national security while delivering negligible cost savings.”[11] Hao believes, “Dismantling the behind-the-scenes scientific research programs that backstop American life could lead to long-lasting, perhaps irreparable damage to everything from the quality of health care to the public’s access to next-generation consumer technologies.” Deming agrees. He concludes, “Ill-conceived budget cuts … will make us sicker, poorer, and less innovative in the years to come.”

Footnotes
[1] Stephen DeAngelis, “The Usefulness of Useless Knowledge in an Innovative World,” Enterra Insights, 14 July 2017.
[2] Jeffrey Mervis, “Data check: U.S. government share of basic research funding falls below 50%,” Science, 9 March 2017.
[3] Abraham Flexner, “The Usefulness of Useless Knowledge,” Harper’s Magazine, June/November 1939.
[4] Peter Gwynne, “US science in chaos as impact of Trump’s executive orders sinks in,” Physics World, 12 February 2025.
[5] Sam Stein, “The DOGE Brain Drain Has Begun,” The Bulwark, 19 February 2025.
[6] Stuart Dyos, “DOGE shut the funding spigot for medical research overnight. Scientists are calling it ‘the end of science’ in America,” Fortune, 21 February 2025.
[7] Brian Buntz, “NSF layoffs in 2025: Deep budget cuts headed for U.S. research sector,” R&D World, 15 February 2025.
[8] David Deming, “DOGE Is Failing on Its Own Terms,” The Atlantic, 11 February 2025.
[9] Brandon Vigliarolo, “National Science Foundation staff axed by Trump fear for US scientific future,” The Register, 21 February 2025.
[10] Karen Hao, “The foundations of America’s prosperity are being dismantled,” MIT Technology Review, 21 February 2025.
[11] Sebastian Moss, “Computing Research Association warns cutting 12% of US National Science Foundation will undermine IT leadership,” Data Center Dynamics, 20 February 2025.