On Friday, the US Office of Management and Budget provided Senator Susan Collins, the chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee, with a preview of the Trump administration’s budget proposal for 2026. The budget is set to implement significant cuts across almost all federal departments and agencies.
In line with the administration’s criticism of research organizations, funding for scientific research is expected to face steep reductions. Specifically, the National Institutes of Health could see its budget slashed by 40 percent, while the National Science Foundation might experience a staggering 55 percent cut compared to its 2025 budget. The proposed budget outlines cuts for nearly all entities involved in scientific endeavors or research funding.
Equally alarming is the tone used to defend these budget cuts, which resembles a partisan commentary more than an official financial plan.
Cuts in Health Funding
The presence of a Health and Human Services secretary who questions fundamental scientific concepts is unlikely to bode well for US health initiatives, and the proposed budget is anticipated to exacerbate existing issues. The proposed MAHA (Make America Healthy Again) initiative is
slated to receive $500 million, while the majority of other health programs face reductions.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) is projected to lose around $3.6 billion from its current budget of $9.6 billion, mainly due to the closure of several key divisions. These include the National Center for Chronic Diseases Prevention and Health Promotion, the National Center for Environmental Health, the National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, and the Global Health Center, along with its division focused on Public Health Preparedness and Response. The budget document claims that these offices are “duplicative, DEI, or simply unnecessary.”
Moreover, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) will face challenges due to the elimination of a $4 billion initiative designed to assist low-income families with energy expenses. The Office of Management and Budget posits that these costs will decrease due to increased energy production, suggesting that states should assume responsibility for these expenses. This strategic shift of financial burdens to states is a recurring theme in the budget proposal, which may disproportionately impact the poorest states, despite these areas having significant support for Trump in past elections.
