What 2026 Could Bring for Science Policy: NIH Funding, Federal Cuts, and the Future of U.S. Science

NPR’s Shortwave closes 2025 by examining how federal funding shifts have affected science in the United States. The episode highlights the NIH funding crisis, widespread disruption at NSF, NOAA, and NASA, and the toll on researchers, grants, and the next generation of scientists. Through interviews with Rob Stein, Katie Riddle, Sylvia Zhou, and Brandon Coventry, the show explores morale, career uncertainty, and the political debates shaping science policy. It also considers the administration’s arguments for shakeups and the risk of continued chaos in 2026, ending with a reminder that Shortwave will cover the coming year and the future of public science funding and editorial independence. The episode frames science policy as a public service issue tied to health, innovation, education, and national leadership.

Overview

NPR's Shortwave analyzes the turbulence in U.S. science funding as 2025 ends, focusing on the NIH funding crisis and broader disruptions across major federal science agencies. The episode weaves together perspectives from researchers and policymakers to illuminate how shifts in funding and policy affect biomedical research, the scientific workforce, and the next generation of scientists. It also situates these developments within a longer historical frame about the role of science in national prosperity and leadership.

"Move fast and break things without a whole lot of interest in what the consequences might be" - Dr. Jay Bhattacharya

Historical Context: Postwar Investments and Policy Debates

The program surveys a turning point in American science funding that began around World War II, when government investment helped spawn major advances and institutions. The narrative connects those mid-century decisions to today’s policy debates, where science funding is tied to national competitiveness and public trust. It also presents the administration's argument that scientific institutions need shaking up to stimulate new ideas.

"it's just, you know, shooting ourselves in the foot" - Bruce Alberts

Current Landscape: NIH, NSF, NOAA, NASA Under Financial Pressure

The discussion centers on the NIH, the largest public funder of biomedical science, and reports of staff reductions and grant terminations affecting vaccines, cancer research, and other critical areas. The episode notes widespread cancellations and uncertainty across NSF, NOAA, NASA, and even the Department of Veterans Affairs, with a particular concern for the pipeline of young scientists and their willingness to stay in the U.S. labor market.

"drone attacks coming from above, no names, no email addresses" - Sylvia Zhou

Implications for Scientists and the Next Generation

Personal stories highlight the human cost of funding volatility. A young researcher contemplates leaving the United States to seek stability abroad, while others describe demoralization and long-term career risk. The episode frames these tensions as central to the future of U.S. scientific leadership and national health outcomes.

"If I move, that's permanent, and I am 100% willing to do that" - Brandon Coventry

Policy Perspectives and Future Outlook

The show presents contrasting viewpoints on how to balance reform with stability, including concerns about editorial independence in public media and the role of public investment in science. The final takeaway is a cautious sense that 2026 could bring continued policy churn, but that the Shortwave team will keep reporting on how science policy evolves and what it means for researchers and audiences alike.

"I think the future is bright" - Dr. Jay Bhattacharya