The US government closure commenced on 1 October, caused by a deadlock between the Republican Party and Democrats in Congress regarding a new fiscal year funding bill, has once again thrown the nation’s research sector into chaos. This standstill is causing concern not only among prominent figures and organizations in research policy but also to the Republican chairman of the congressional committee that oversees a large portion of the country’s research activities.
Since 2013, there have been three US government shutdowns, including one in 2013 during President Obama’s tenure that lasted 17 days. The most extended shutdown, however, took place in late 2018 during Donald Trump’s first term, lasting over a month. The Congressional Budget Office reports that this shutdown led to an estimated $3 billion loss, which is approximately 0.02% of the nation’s GDP.
Neal Lane, a physicist and former science advisor to President Bill Clinton, as well as a former director of the US National Science Foundation, points out that during the shutdown, grant proposals at his former agency and others are not being evaluated, and funding is not being disbursed to grantees at research institutions. Furthermore, communication between researchers and agency program officials is largely obstructed. Lane worries that an extended shutdown could significantly hinder American science.
Congressman Brian Babin, chair of the House Science, Space, and Technology Committee, has cautioned that the shutdown poses a risk to America’s scientific and technological programs. He mentioned that vital NASA missions with national security relevance and groundbreaking research might face delays.
Sudip Parikh, Chief Executive of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), contends that a government shutdown stifles US innovation. He stresses that the shutdown defers establishing clear research priorities for the country, thus exacerbating the prevailing uncertainty within the scientific community. Joanne Padrón Carney of the AAAS adds that while research that has already received funding will continue, access to facilities and federal lands for field experiments will be restricted, and there are worries about possible structural changes to federal agencies that could impact research programs.
Multiple advocacy organizations, including the Association of American Universities, the Association of Public and Land-grant Universities, the American Council on Education, and the Science Coalition, have issued statements urging Congress and President Trump to resolve the funding impasse as the shutdown disrupts research funding at universities. However, organizations such as the American Chemical Society and the American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology have opted not to comment.
John Holdren, a climate scientist and former science advisor to President Obama, underscores the adverse effects on US research funding under the Trump administration, particularly in climate science, renewable energy, and public health. He also highlights the slowdown in grant funding and its potential repercussions on the research workforce, both within the US and abroad.
Holdren further asserts that the shutdown will lead to delays for approved but unfunded grants, depending on the length of the government closure and the administration’s choices regarding federal worker furloughs versus firings. He claims that even without a shutdown, the administration’s handling of federal research has been detrimental to science, impacting the US economy, health, and international reputation. A long-term shutdown, he warns, could worsen these challenges.
Jeremy Berg, a biochemist and former director at the National Institutes of Health, shares his uncertainty about the duration of the shutdown and how agencies will cope with the situation. Previously assured in agencies’ capability to reduce shutdown disruptions, Berg notes that the current circumstances no longer instill such confidence.