Image

AIBS Public Policy Report, Volume 26, Issue 12, June 16, 2025

 

  • More Details Emerge on FY 2026 Science Budget Requests
  • House Appropriators Consider FY 2026 Agriculture Spending
  • RFK Jr. Fires Entire CDC Vaccine Panel, Appoints New Members
  • NIH Staff Sign Bethesda Declaration Urging Reversal of Grant Cuts
  • Fulbright Board Resigns Over Political Interference
  • AIBS Submits Joint Comments on Proposed Rule to Reclassify Many Federal Workers
  • AIBS Urges Congress to Reject Proposed Cuts to NIH Budget
  • Societies Write to Congress Urging Oversight of NSF Reorganization & Cuts
  • Increase Your Career Opportunities: Writing for Impact and Influence Course
  • Meet with Your Lawmakers This Summer and Help Inform Science Policy
  • Short Takes
    • Former NSF Advisory Committee Members Write to Leadership, Congress
    • NSF Virtual Office Hour on CAREER
    • BioScience Article Addresses Collections' Role in Pandemic Preparedness
    • Trump Withdraws NASA Director Nomination
    • NSF Frontiers in Ocean Sciences Symposium
    • Call for Sessions: 2025 AAAS Forum on S&T Policy
    • New Report: Understanding and Addressing Misinformation About Science
  • From the Federal Register
 

The AIBS Public Policy Report is distributed broadly by email every two weeks. Any interested party may self-subscribe to receive these free reports by email.

 

With proper attribution to AIBS, all material from these reports may be reproduced or forwarded. AIBS staff appreciates receiving copies of materials used. If you have questions, comments, or suggestions, please contact the AIBS Director of Public Policy, Jyotsna Pandey, at 202-628-1500 x 225.

 

More Details Emerge on FY 2026 Science Budget Requests

 

The Trump Administration has released additional details about its fiscal year (FY) 2026 budget request, which proposes significant funding cuts to science agencies and programs.

 

The table below outlines the Administration's proposed funding levels for key science agencies and programs, along with the percentage change compared to FY 2025 levels.

Highlights include:

  • At the Department of Energy (DOE), $3.7 billion in unspent bipartisan infrastructure law funds would be canceled. The Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy would be cut by 70%, with staffing halved and focus shifted to geothermal and hydropower. The DOE Office of Science faces a 14% reduction, with Biological and Environmental Research (BER) slated to shrink by more than half. BER activities in environmental system sciences, atmospheric system research, earth system modeling, data management, and the Atmospheric Radiation Measurement User Facility are slated for termination with focus shifting to biotechnology.
  • The National Institutes of Health would see a roughly $18 billion cut and consolidation of its 27 institutes and centers into eight. This reorganization would retain the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institute on Aging, National Institute of General Medical Sciences, and National Cancer Institute, but eliminate those focused on minority health, alternative medicine, nursing, and global health. Remaining institutes would be consolidated into four new ones focused on body systems, neuroscience, behavioral health, and child and women's health. The proposal supports the 15% cap on indirect rates (currently blocked by courts) and includes $226 million in 21st Century Cures Act authorized funding.
  • The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention faces a 53% cut, reducing funding to $4.3 billion and shrinking staff by 43%. Most noninfectious disease functions would be eliminated or moved to a new Administration for a Healthy America (AHA), including Alzheimer's research. Infectious disease programs also face major cuts, with funding for a program to prevent viral hepatitis, sexually transmitted infections, and tuberculosis slashed from $1.5 billion to $300 million.
  • The Advanced Research Project Agency for Health (ARPA-H) would receive $945 billion (-37%) and move into a new office for the Assistant Secretary for a Healthy Future.
  • The Department of the Interior would lose over 5,000 full-time staff at the National Park Service (NPS), which is facing a 37% cut. Support for Resource Stewardship at NPS would shrink by half.
  • The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), slated for a 39% cut overall, would eliminate the Ecosystems Mission Area, shifting focus to energy and mineral security. Science Support (-24%) and Core Science Systems (-28%) within USGS would also see cuts.
  • The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) is slated for a 32% reduction overall. Cuts are proposed across the board for resource management (-24%), ecological services (-13%), habitat conservation (-4%), National Wildlife Refuge System (-22%), conservation and enforcement (-20%), and fish and aquatic conservation (-32%), with Science Applications being zeroed out.
  • The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) would see its workforce reduced by 9%--to its smallest size since the 1980s--and its budget slashed by more than half. EPA science and technology programs would be slashed by 34%, with large cuts to research on air and energy (-65%), chemical safety (-28%), sustainable communities (-56%), and safe and sustainable water resources (-29%).
  • The National Aeronautics and Space Administration's FY 2026 budget proposes a 47% cut to science programs, including deep cuts to biological and physical sciences (-71%) and earth science (-52%). The plan would eliminate the Office of STEM Engagement.
  • Budget for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) would be cut by $1.7 billion to $4.5 billion. The Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research would be terminated and the National Ocean Service (-32%) and National Marine Fisheries Service (-28%) would see their budgets shrink. The National Weather Service would receive a 6% bump.
  • The National Institute of Standards and Technology, facing a 28% cut overall, would see a 17% cut to its Scientific and Technical Research and Services.
  • At the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), total discretionary funding would decrease by 22%. Intramural agricultural research in the Agricultural Research Service (ARS) would receive a 5% cut. The National Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA), which partners with academic institutions to conduct extramural research, education, and extension activities, would get a 38% cut. Within NIFA, competitively awarded extramural research supported by the Agriculture and Food Research Initiative (AFRI) would shrink from $445 million to $405 million. The National Agricultural Statistics Service would get a $2.5 million cut to its budget to $185 million.
  • The U.S. Forest Service (USFS) would see its discretionary budget slashed by 65% to $2.1 billion. The plan would eliminate funding for the forest and rangeland research, wildland fire management, and state, private, and tribal forestry accounts at USFS. The administration proposes unifying federal wildland fire responsibilities, including those within USFS, into a single new U.S. Wildland Fire Service at the Department of the Interior to improve efficiency.
  • Budget for the Smithsonian Institution would shrink by 12%, with the salaries account facing a 6% cut and the facilities account looking at a nearly 40% cut. The National Museum of Natural History would receive $51 million (-8%) under the salaries account with an additional $21 million for revitalization efforts.
  • Details about the National Science Foundation's (NSF) $3.9 billion budget request were shared in a previous issue of this newsletter. The Coalition for National Science Funding, of which AIBS is a member, released a statement calling on Congress "to reject these massive cuts and instead sustain and grow NSF in FY 2026 to invest in our innovation, discovery, and competitiveness."

 

House Appropriators Consider FY 2026 Agriculture Spending

 

Earlier this month, the House Agriculture Appropriations Subcommittee advanced its fiscal year (FY) 2026 agriculture spending bill along party lines. The bill would cut discretionary funding at the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) by $807 million to $21.9 billion, while rejecting the Administration's proposed deep cuts to agricultural research.

 

The bill eliminates climate hubs and climate corps funding, and reduces support for conservation and urban agriculture. However, it provides essentially flat funding for the Agricultural Research Service (ARS) at $1.79 billion and maintains support for the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service at $1.15 billion for pest and disease control. The National Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA) would receive a $25 million or 1.5% cut to $1.65 billion, with the Agriculture and Food Research Initiative (AFRI) receiving flat funding of $445 million.

 

ARS, NIFA, and AFRI are all slated for larger cuts in the President's budget request (see table above). A report accompanying the bill states that the committee "rejects proposed research program terminations, including those to extramural research partnerships."

 

Subcommittee Chair Andy Harris (R-MD) said the bill prioritizes agricultural research and broadband expansion, and "reflects a clear, conservative commitment to fiscal responsibility." Democrats opposed the cuts to climate programs, arguing the bill would increase costs for rural communities.

 

The full Appropriations Committee debated the bill on June 11 but Appropriations Chair Tom Cole (R-OK) delayed a final vote, citing scheduling issues.

 

 

RFK Jr. Fires Entire CDC Vaccine Panel, Appoints New Members

 

U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. abruptly dismissed all 17 members of a prominent vaccine-advisory panel at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) last week, citing persistent "conflicts of interest" and accusing the group of serving as a "rubber stamp" for vaccines.

 

Kennedy, who has a long history of promoting vaccine misinformation, appointed 8 new members to the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices just days later--bypassing the standard vetting process that typically takes years. Several appointees are known vaccine skeptics, with ties to anti-vaccination organizations and social media campaigns criticizing COVID-19 vaccines.

 

According to a Science analysis, the new panel members have, on average, authored about 78% fewer vaccine-related papers in peer-reviewed biomedical journals than their predecessors. Notably, half of the new members have not published any such papers at all.

 

Public health experts warn this shake-up could erode public trust, with former Food and Drug Administration chief scientist Jesse Goodman calling it "political meddling" that will reduce confidence rather than increase it.

 

 

NIH Staff Sign Bethesda Declaration Urging Reversal of Grant Cuts

 

More than 340 current or recent staff members at the National Institutes of Health (NIH) sent an open letter to NIH Director Dr. Jay Bhattacharya last week in opposition to actions they argue "undermine the NIH mission, waste public resources, and harm the health of Americans and people across the globe."

 

The statement, titled The Bethesda Declaration, accuses the Trump administration of politicizing science and slashing research funding, particularly for projects related to diversity, health disparities, and climate. It urges Bhattacharya to reverse recent grant freezes and cuts. The protest comes as NIH funding disbursements have dropped sharply--down 33% from last year--and ahead of Congress's consideration of the Administration's proposed 40% budget cut for the agency.

 

Bhattacharya responded in a written statement: "The Bethesda Declaration has some fundamental misconceptions about the policy directions the NIH has taken in recent months, including the continuing support of the NIH for international collaboration. Nevertheless, respectful dissent in science is productive. We all want the NIH to succeed."

 

The declaration has drawn support from Nobel laureates, former NIH leaders, and biomedical groups. A letter in support of these individuals has garnered more than 22,000 signatories. The letter of support remains open for signatures.

 

 

Fulbright Board Resigns Over Political Interference

 

All 12 members of the Fulbright Foreign Scholarship Board resigned last week, citing alleged political interference by the Trump Administration.

 

In a public statement, the members said they "voted overwhelmingly to resign from the board, rather than endorse unprecedented actions that we believe are impermissible under the law, compromise U.S. national interests and integrity, and undermine the mission and mandates Congress established for the Fulbright program nearly 80 years ago."

 

The board accused the Administration of overriding the board's authority by revoking numerous scholar awards and initiating an unauthorized review of 1,200 more. They noted that the awards that were revoked included studies in biology, engineering, architecture, agriculture, crop sciences, animal sciences, biochemistry, medical sciences, music, and history. They warned that these actions violate the Fulbright program's founding law and threaten its longstanding mission of academic freedom and international cooperation.

 

The White House defended the moves, saying the Administration has the right to align foreign policy programs with national interests.

 

 

AIBS Submits Joint Comments on Proposed Rule to Reclassify Many Federal Workers

 

AIBS joined the Entomological Society of America and 18 other scientific societies in submitting a joint response to the White House Office of Personnel Management (OPM) proposed rule-making, "Improving Performance, Accountability and Responsiveness in the Civil Service," also commonly known as "Schedule F."

 

The proposed rule would reclassify tens of thousands of federal workers involved in policy-making as "Schedule Policy/Career" employees, stripping them of traditional civil service protections.

 

The joint response strongly urges OPM to reconsider this rule and outlines several concerns and recommendations. Read the comments.

 

 

AIBS Urges Congress to Reject Proposed Cuts to NIH Budget

 

AIBS joined 500 organizations and 2,355 individuals in a letter urging Congress to reject the proposed 38% cut to the National Institutes of Health (NIH) budget included in the President's fiscal year (FY) 2026 budget request.

 

The letter emphasizes that NIH-funded research saves lives, drives medical breakthroughs, and generates economic activity in every state. "It's no secret that China is investing in medical research hand over fist," the letter reads. "Cutting and gutting NIH would be an act of self-defeat for our nation, choking off our previously unrivaled research & development pipeline and leaving Americans dependent on other countries to determine whether their health needs will be met."

 

The letter calls for bold NIH investment and a deliberative, public process before structural changes are made to the agency.

 

 

Societies Write to Congress Urging Oversight of NSF Reorganization & Cuts

 

AIBS joined a coalition of more than 50 professional societies and organizations in sending a letter to Congress expressing support for the National Science Foundation (NSF) and concern about recent organizational and financial developments at the agency.

 

The letter calls on the leaders of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation and the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology to exercise their oversight authority to investigate the recent abrupt reorganizations and reductions in force, plans to reduce its scope, abrupt cancellation of existing grants, and devastating proposed cuts to its future budget.

 

 

Increase Your Career Opportunities: Writing for Impact and Influence Course

 

The American Institute of Biological Sciences (AIBS) is once again offering its popular professional development program to help scientists and students hone their written communication skills to increase the power of their message.

 

Writing for Impact and Influence provides practical instruction and hands-on exercises that will improve the participant's general writing proficiency. The program will provide participants with the skills and tools needed to compose scientific press releases, blog posts, memoranda, and more, with a focus on the reader experience.

 

Each product-oriented session will have an assignment (deadlines are flexible), with feedback from the instructor. The course is interactive, and participants are encouraged to ask questions and exchange ideas with the instructor and other participants. Each session is also recorded and shared with all participants to accommodate scheduling conflicts.

 

Who Should Take the Course?

  • Individuals interested in furthering their professional development by augmenting their writing skills.
  • Graduate students and early-career professionals interested in increasing their marketability to employers.
  • Individuals interested in more effectively informing and influencing segments of the public, supervisors, policymakers, reporters, organizational leaders, and others.

The course consists of six weekly 90-minute online modules conducted live and subsequently archived online for participant review. The course will begin on Wednesday, July 9, 2025, with subsequent course sessions held weekly on Wednesdays, through August 13.  Individuals who actively participate in and complete the full course will receive a certificate recognizing that they have completed a nine-hour professional development course on business writing for scientists.

 

Register now.

 

 

Meet with Your Lawmakers This Summer and Help Inform Science Policy

 

The American Institute of Biological Sciences is pleased to announce that registration is now open for the 2025 Biological Sciences Congressional District Visits event.

 

Now in its 16th year, this national initiative is an opportunity for biologists across the country to meet with their federal or state elected officials to showcase the people, facilities, and equipment that are required to support and conduct scientific research.  This initiative helps to put a face on science and to remind lawmakers that science is happening in their district and state.

 

The Biological Sciences Congressional District Visits event enables scientists, graduate students, representatives of research facilities, and people affiliated with scientific collections to meet with their federal or state elected officials without traveling to Washington, DC.  Participating scientists can meet with their elected officials at the local district office or invite them to visit their research facility.

 

"I am grateful for the experience, which has enriched my professional development. I am particularly pleased to think that we started a conversation with Rep. Joyce Beatty's office that will continue in the future. I encourage everyone to reach out beyond their scientific community, which includes explaining your science to your district offices."

- Coralie Farinas, Graduate Student, Ohio State University

 

AIBS will schedule participants' meetings with lawmakers and will prepare participants through online training and one-on-one support.  Meetings will take place mid-July through October, depending on the participant's schedule and their lawmaker's availability.  Read the Frequently Asked Questions for more information.

 

This event is made possible by the American Institute of Biological Sciences, with the support of event sponsors American Society of Primatologists, Botanical Society of America, Organization of Biological Field Stations, Paleontological Society, and Society for the Study of Evolution.

 

Registration for participation is free, but required and closes on July 14, 2025.  To learn more and register, visit io.aibs.org/cdv.

 

 

Short Takes

  • Members of the 12 federal advisory committees at the National Science Foundation (NSF) that were dissolved earlier this year wrote a letter to the acting NSF director, the chair of the National Science Board, and Congress emphasizing the importance of independent scientific advice and urging that the committees be reinstated.
  • The Division of Integrative Organismal Systems at the National Science Foundation (NSF) will host a Virtual Office Hour on June 18 at 1:00 pm Eastern to discuss NSF's Faculty Early Career Development Program (CAREER). Register now. The current CAREER solicitation has a full proposal submission date of July 23, 2025.
  • Natural history collections, which house around 3 billion specimens globally, are a valuable but underutilized resource for pandemic preparedness. A recent BioScience article, co-authored by 45 experts, highlights how these collections can inform responses to emerging diseases by revealing pathogen origins, host distributions, and spillover conditions. The authors call for better interdisciplinary collaboration, increased awareness, and investment in digitization, workforce development, and infrastructure to unlock the full public health potential of these collections.
  • President Trump withdrew his nomination of Jared Isaacman to lead the National Aeronautics and Space Administration a few days before the Senate's planned final vote on his nomination. According to Trump, the decision was a result of Isaacman's "prior associations," a reference to donations he had made to Democrats.
  • In celebration of June as World Ocean Month, the NSF Division of Ocean Sciences is organizing the 7th annual "Frontiers in Ocean Sciences Symposium," which highlights NSF-supported scientists transforming ocean science. This year's symposium will be focused the recently released National Academies' report, "Forecasting the Ocean: The 2025-2035 Decade of Ocean Science." Learn more and register.
  • The American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) is hosting its annual Forum on Science and Technology (S&T) Policy: Farm to Table Science Policy(making) on October 22-24, 2025, in Washington, D.C. and is inviting proposals for sessions. The call for sessions is open through end of day Friday, June 20.
  • The National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine have released a new report titled, Understanding and Addressing Misinformation About Science. The report is a comprehensive assessment of the evidence on misinformation about science and provides a systems view of the problem given broader historical and contemporary contexts. It discusses the impacts of misinformation about science and potential solutions across a diversity of individual peoples, communities, and societies.

 

From the Federal Register

The following items appeared in the Federal Register from June 2 to 13, 2025.

 

Commerce

  • 33rd General Advisory Committee to the U.S. Section to the Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission and 18th Scientific Advisory Subcommittee to the General Advisory Committee; Meeting Announcement
  • NOAA Science Advisory Board

Environmental Protection Agency

  • Notice of Meeting of the EPA Children's Health Protection Advisory Committee (CHPAC)
  • Science Advisory Committee on Chemicals (SACC) Peer Review; Notice of SACC Meeting; Availability of Draft Documents and Request for Comment

Health and Human Services

  • Meeting of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices
  • National Cancer Institute; Notice of Meeting

 National Science Foundation

  • Agency Information Collection Activities; Comment Request
  • Agency Information Collection Activities: Comment Request
  • Sunshine Act Meetings
 

AIBS is committed to promoting the use of science to inform decisions that advance the biological sciences for the benefit of science and society. We need your support to help achieve our mission.  Some ways you can support AIBS:

Donate Today!
Join AIBS   
Become an Advocate

The American Institute of Biological Sciences is a nonprofit 501(c)(3) public charitable organization dedicated to promoting the use of science to inform decision making for the benefit of science and society. Founded in 1947 as a part of the National Academy of Sciences, AIBS became an independent, member-governed organization in the 1950s. Our staff members work to achieve the mission by publishing the peer-reviewed journal BioScience, by providing scientific peer review and advisory services to a wide variety of research organizations, and by collaborating with scientists, students, and institutions to advance public policy, education, and the public understanding of science.

Web SiteLinkedInYouTubeBluesky