On National Institutes of Health Funding
Last week, Judge Angel Kelley of the U.S. District Court in Boston issued a temporary restraining order related to the National Institutes of Health's funding cuts. A hearing is scheduled for February 21. The following are selected views on the matter.
U.S. Senator Susan Collins, Chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee: “I oppose the poorly conceived directive imposing an arbitrary cap on the indirect costs that are part of NIH grants … these cuts, which in some cases would apply retroactively, would be devastating, stopping vital biomedical research and leading to the loss of jobs.”
Stanford Provost Jenny Martinez: “A cut of this magnitude would potentially have deep impacts on medical care, human health, and America’s place in the world as the leader of biomedical research.”
Harvard President Alan Garber: “Federal funding for scientific research has helped make the United States a magnet for outstanding talent, a springboard for ambitious ideas, and a wellspring of rapid progress … manifested in life-saving treatments and technological innovations that have strengthened our economy.”
Elena Fuentes-Afflick, Chief Scientific Officer, Association of American Medical Colleges: “People understand the impact of NIH-funded research on jobs and the impact of science on people’s well-being … This has been received as a very significant threat.”
White House Spokesperson Kush Desai: “Contrary to the hysteria, redirecting billions of allocated NIH spending away from administrative bloat means there will be more money and resources available for legitimate scientific research, not less."
OUR TAKE
The NIH funding dispute transcends simple budget reform, revealing a critical tension between immediate fiscal pressures and America's long-term ability to drive medical innovation and maintain global research leadership.
While reducing administrative overhead may seem fiscally prudent, abrupt funding changes threaten to unravel the research ecosystem by destabilizing clinical trials, endangering smaller institutions, and eroding essential infrastructure that private funding typically neglects.
A sustainable path forward requires an approach that balances fiscal oversight with scientific progress through graduated reforms - including institution-scaled indirect cost rates and strategic public-private partnerships - while safeguarding the stable funding foundation that has historically enabled transformative discoveries.