I’ve spent the last four years running experiments, managing undergraduate researchers and authoring multiple papers. I’ve poured my early adult years into becoming exactly what this country claims it needs: a trained scientist ready to tackle the next generation of challenges. So when I sat down a few weeks ago to apply for graduate funding through the Department of Defense, the National Science Foundation and the Department of Energy, I assumed my credentials would speak for themselves.
I was wrong. Dead wrong.
Instead of a merit-based process, I walked into a bureaucratic nightmare of frozen grants, contradictory policies and political retribution masquerading as fiscal responsibility. This isn’t a headache just for aspiring doctoral students, it’s an assault on all American research, industry and our collective intelligence.
The Trump administration has targeted over 4,000 grants for termination to more than 600 universities across all 50 states, targeting between $6.9 and $8.2 billion in funding. This isn’t fat-trimming anymore; it's sawing off limbs.
The National Science Foundation alone canceled hundreds of grants deemed not to align with program goals targeting a variety of research from the environment to misinformation. Meanwhile, the Department of Energy slashed solar energy funding by 87% and wind energy by 78%, redirecting money to fossil fuels while claiming it’s about energy dominance.
The Department of Defense joined the chaos in May, capping indirect costs on new awards at 15%. Those indirect costs cover essential research infrastructure such as lab space, computers and even administrative support. Cutting these doesn’t actually make research cheaper; it makes it tedious and almost impossible. Universities and researchers simply can’t run productive labs on goodwill and broken equipment.
Harvard’s Faculty of Arts and Sciences cut PhD admissions by more than half across departments, with some science departments slashing admissions by 75%. Penn Medicine reduced its PhD cohort by 35%, citing federal funding. At Duke, nearly 600 staff and 40 faculty have accepted voluntary separation, with involuntary layoffs underway.
But this hits smaller programs harder. They simply have no choice but to shut down. Michigan State paused 27 graduate programs due to federal grant cuts. The University of Southern California laid off nearly 1,000 employees and paused many PhD programs.
Yet, while we’re gutting programs that train the next generation, China is now doing more research on artificial intelligence than the United States, the United Kingdom and the European Union combined. We’re literally kneecapping our future as the dominant research force.
For decades, U.S. graduate programs thrived by attracting the world’s best minds. In 2023-24, we had a record 500,000+ international graduate students, with nearly 250,000 enrolled in OPT to work in the U.S. after graduation. These students were creating jobs for Americans, founding startups and filing patents at extraordinary rates.
That pipeline is now breaking apart. The Trump administration has revoked visas for more than 300 foreign students exercising their First Amendment rights and erased thousands of records from the government’s student tracking system. Even Harvard faced the threat of losing its certification to host international students. To restore funding to Columbia University, the administration demanded $221 million and detailed information on students.
Now I’m watching mentors and peers — people who dedicated their lives to curing cancer, building quantum computers, understanding the climate — pack their bags for Europe. Today, 75% of U.S. scientists are considering leaving for Europe or Canada. France is already capitalizing on this exodus with its Safe Place For Science program, offering researchers a secure and stimulating environment to pursue their work freely.
For graduate students like me, this creates an impossible choice. Do I commit six years of my life to a PhD program in the US when I can’t guarantee funding past year two? Do I advise younger students to pursue research when I know the funding cliff awaits them? I’ve already warned promising students that the project they’re excited about might vanish if they includes political keywords.
The administration claims it's creating a golden age of innovation by prioritizing AI and quantum research. But you can’t build a quantum workforce by burning down the foundation. The beauty of basic science is you don’t know where the next revolution will come from. By only funding research that fits political dogma, we all but guarantee we’ll miss it.
This isn’t about left versus right; it’s about our security and future. The post-World War II partnership between the federal government and research institutions gave us the internet, GPS, vaccines and countless companies that power today’s economy. Dismantling that partnership will undermine U.S. competitiveness and weaken the economy.
The real solution requires congressional action to protect scientific funding from political whim. It requires recognizing that America’s strength has never been its ability to enforce orthodoxy but instead our capacity to embrace chaotic, creative, unconventional thinking. That’s what federal research funding enables. It’s an investment that returns $20 to the economy for every dollar spent.
If we want American greatness, we need to fund American scientists. All of them. Not just the ones who parrot your politics.
When historians write about America’s decline, they’ll point to many causes. But the chapter on 2025 will be titled: "When the USA Chose Stupidity."
Let’s hope we get a rewrite before it’s too late.