Issue 10 (May 13)

The recent Why Social Science? post comes from Mark Mather and Beth Jarosz from the Population Reference Bureau who write about the importance of demography and how it can help community leaders, policymakers, business leaders, advocates, and residents plan effectively for a thriving future. Read on for more

Deadlines in the House of Representatives and Senate for FY 2026 funding requests are rapidly approaching. It is critical that lawmakers hear from you TODAY to urge their support for federal science agencies.

One way that Members of Congress can express their support for science funding is by signing a “Dear Colleague Letter.” These letters, which are led or sponsored by one or sometimes several Members of Congress, are circulated to all Congressional offices to solicit additional signatures. The final letters are sent to the Appropriations Committees and typically urge the committee to include a specific funding level for an agency or program in the annual appropriations bill. They are a way for lawmakers to officially support funding for federal science agencies.

There are currently several Dear Colleague Letters circulating in House and Senate that are important to the COSSA community. They call for increased funding for the National Science Foundation, National Institutes of Health, Institute of Education Sciences, Census Bureau, and National Center for Health Statistics. We need as many Congressional signatures as possible.

Please send a quick note to your House Representatives and Senators urging them to sign each of the Dear Colleague Letters.

Visit our ACTION CENTER page to easily send a message. Note: We have provided separate actions for the Senate and House, so please utilize both links.

See our Senate action alert here and the House action alert here.

As previously reported by COSSA, Congress is in the process of drafting budget reconciliation bills for one “big, beautiful bill” to extend the Trump Administration’s tax breaks. Late last week, the House Energy and Commerce Committee and the House Ways and Means Committee released their draft bills and are scheduled to mark them up this week. The House Agriculture Committee is also scheduled to mark up their bill.

House Republicans are hoping to pass their bills before Memorial Day and expecting to pass the final bill before the month-long August recess. However, the House Energy and Commerce bill will be challenging for Congress to pass as the bill proposes substantial reform to Medicaid that would see millions of Americans lose coverage over the next decade, a point of contention among the party as some Republicans see these changes as “eliminating waste” while others see the proposals as detrimental cuts to working class families (see previous COSSA coverage). On May 12, Senator Josh Hawley (R-MO) published an opinion editorial in the New York Times opposing the bill, urging Republicans to “ignore calls to cut Medicaid and start delivering on America’s promise for America’s working people.”

Stay tuned to COSSA’s continued coverage on Congressional activities.

On April 30, Senate Appropriators held a bipartisan hearing on Biomedical Research: Keeping America’s Edge in Innovation where they invited several witnesses from the scientific community, including Dr. Sudip Parikh, Chief Executive Officer of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), Dr. Hermann Haller, President of the Mount Desert Island Biological Laboratory, Dr. Cartier Esham, Executive Director of the Alliance for a Stronger Food and Drug Administration, Dr. Barry Paul Sleckman, Director of the University of Alabama at Birmingham O’Neal Comprehensive Cancer Center, and Emily Stenson, a patient advocate.

During the hearing, several members of the committee across the aisle voiced support for biomedical research. In her opening remarks, Chair Susan Collins (R-ME) emphasized how detrimental recent proposals from the Trump Administration, including a 15 percent cap on the National Institutes of Health (NIH) indirect costs, could be to the U.S. scientific research enterprise. Ranking Member Patty Murray (D-WA) echoed these concerns, adding that the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) has been “cutting critical research without rhyme, reason, or any regard for who gets hurt.”

Some Republicans indicated support for the budget cuts, including Senator John Kennedy (R-LA), who pressed Parikh on his pushback against capping NIH indirect costs, comparing NIH to other organizations with lower caps. To this end, Parikh argued that the comparison could not be made due to the differences between what is considered an indirect cost versus a direct cost across organizations, calling it “apples to oranges.” However, many Republicans cautioned against budget cuts that could hinder future biomedical innovation, including Senator Jerry Moran (R-KS) and Lisa Murkowski (R-AK).

The committee is expected to hold a second hearing on biomedical research, but it has yet to be scheduled. Find more of COSSA’s coverage of Congressional hearings here.

Trump Administration Actions (all actions available here):

• Improving the Safety and Security of Biological Research (5/5/25)
• Strengthening Probationary Periods in the Federal Service (4/24/25)
• White House Initiative to Promote Excellence and Innovation at Historically Black Colleges and Universities (4/23/25)
• Reforming Accreditation to Strengthen Higher Education (4/23/25)
• PROPOSED RULE: Improving Performance, Accountability, and the Civil Service (4/23/25) (MORE INFORMATION)
• Transparency Regarding Foreign Influence at American Universities (4/23/25)
• Extension of Hiring Freeze (4/17/25) 
• Restoring Truth and Sanity to American History (3/27/25) (MORE INFORMATION)
• Improving Education Outcomes by Empowering Parents, States, and Communities (3/20/25) (MORE INFORMATION)
• Continuing the Reduction of the Federal Bureaucracy (3/14/25) (MORE INFORMATION)
• Additional Rescissions of Harmful Executive Orders and Actions (3/14/25)
• Implementing the President’s DOGE Cost Efficiency Initiative (2/26/25) (MORE INFORMATION)
• Ensuring Lawful Governance and Implementing the President’s DOGE Deregulatory Initiative (2/19/25) (MORE INFORMATION)
• Radical Transparency about Wasteful Spending (2/18/25) (MORE INFORMATION)
• Establishing the President’s Make America Healthy Again Commission (2/13/25)
• Implementing the President’s “Department of Government Efficiency” Workforce Optimization Initiative (2/11/25) (MORE INFORMATION)
• Advancing United States Interests When Funding Nongovernmental Organizations (2/6/25) (MORE INFORMATION)
• Ending Radical Indoctrination in K-12 Schooling (1/29/25)
• President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (1/23/25)
• Removing Barriers to American Leadership in Artificial Intelligence (1/23/25)
• Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity (1/21/24) (MORE INFORMATION)
• Ending Radical and Wasteful Government DEI Programs and Preferencing (1/20/25)
• Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Trust to the Federal Government (1/20/25)
• Establishing and Implementing the President’s “Department of Government Efficiency” (1/20/25)
• Restoring Accountability to Policy-Influencing Positions within the Federal Workforce (1/20/25) – Reinstates Trump Administration’s 2020 EO creating a new Schedule F in the Federal Excepted Service 
• Withdrawing the U.S. from the WHO (1/20/25)
• Putting America First in International Environmental Agreements (1/20/25) – Withdraws the U.S. from the Paris Climate Accord, among other actions.
• Hiring Freeze (1/20/25) (MORE INFORMATION)
• Return to In-Person Work (1/20/25) (MORE INFORMATION)
• Restoring Freedom of Speech and Ending Federal Censorship (1/20/25)
• Initial Rescissions of Harmful Executive Orders and Actions (1/20/25) – Rescinds dozens of Biden Administration Executive Orders

Find COSSA’s full list of Trump’s Executive Actions and more information here or on the Social Science Space Tracker.

COSSA continues to follow the flurry of executive actions taken by the Trump Administration and the impact those actions are having on the social and behavioral science community. Below are some of the latest developments coming out of the White House. Past updates are available here.

The Dismantling of NSF Continues

As previously reported, the President’s so-called Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) arrived at the National Science Foundation (NSF) in April, leading to the termination of more funded projects, elimination of directorate advisory committees, and the resignation of the NSF Director. Last week, as reported by Science, the agency was further upended with the announcement that NSF will be eliminating 37 divisions across all eight directorates and drastically reducing the number of programs offered. According to an internal memo, current division directors and deputy directors will lose their titles and, if they are not terminated, may be reassigned to other positions in or outside of NSF.

The dismantling does not stop there. Science has also reported that the latest Reduction in Force (RIF) order has targeted the Division of Equity for Excellence in STEM (EES) within the STEM Education Directorate (EDU) for elimination. NSF has already removed the EES Division from the EDU Directorate’s website with the following note:

“At the U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF), our mission is to foster scientific progress, improve national health and prosperity, and safeguard our nation’s security. This means making decisions to ensure our efforts align with our priorities. Today, we initiated the reduction in force of the Division of Equity for Excellence in STEM. NSF is mindful of its statutory program obligations and plans to take steps to ensure those continue.”

Latest efforts also target Senior Executive Service (SES) positions at NSF, including “rotators,” who are scientists that take a leave of absence from their academic positions to serve for a few years at the Foundation. An internal memo from NSF Chief Management Officer Micah Cheatham to NSF staff states that of the 143 SES positions available at NSF, only 59 will be required going forward, a reduction of 60 percent. In addition, officials serving in rotator positions will be removed from SES positions over the next 30 days and into “new, executive-level positions where they will retain program responsibility and authority but will no longer supervise federal employees.” The number of temporary workers will be reduced from 368 to 70 and positions will focus on “presidential priorities in artificial intelligence, biotechnology, nuclear energy, quantum science, and translational science.”

This latest RIF, which took effect immediately on May 9, is said to be completed by July 12.

The “restructuring” is meant to reflect NSF’s “new organizational structure and proposed future budgets,” alluding to the President’s proposals to reduce the NSF budget from $9 billion to $3.9 billion in FY 2026 (see related article). However, as COSSA has been reporting, Congress enacted an FY 2025 budget of $9 billion for NSF; the Administration is proceeding with cuts that are not in-line with what Congress has approved, raising serious questions about the legality of these actions.

A day before the restructuring announcement, Democrats on the House Science Committee sent a letter to the new acting NSF Director Brian Stone demanding answers to their questions about the process for identifying terminated grants. Few of the Committee’s past requests have been answered by the agency.

This is a developing story.

National Science Board Remains Silent

On May 2, the NSF employee’s union AFGE Local 3403 sent a letter to the National Science Board (NSB) calling on them to push back against Administration efforts. The letter states, “As this crisis has built over the last 100 days, the NSB has been largely silent. We do not believe that you agree with what is happening. We urge you to speak up.”

However, during the latest NSB meeting on May 7, there was little acknowledgement of recent efforts in the open sessions, including grant terminations, except for a brief thanking of NSF employees who “are retiring or leaving the agency.”

Today, NSB Member and former OSTP Director under the Biden Administration Alondra Nelson announced her resignation from the Board, to which she was appointed last year. In the Time piece announcing her resignation, Nelson notes that following last week’s meeting, which was “observed” by a DOGE representative, “The message I received was that the National Science Board had a role to play in name only.”

Save NSF Coalition

In response to Administration actions, a new Save NSF coalition has formed with the purpose of providing the scientific community with resources they can use to advocate for NSF funding and the science it supports. The website includes an action center with letter templates, phone scripts, and social posts with helpful data points about the importance of NSF.

The website also includes an open letter from the NSF employees union to the scientific community with additional resources.

Foundations Step Up to Help Impacted Researchers

In response to grant terminations at NSF, the Spencer Foundation, in collaboration with the Kapor Foundation, the William T. Grant Foundation, and the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, are offering “rapid response bridge grants” to impacted scholars. Grants in the amount of $25,000 are available for researchers working on research on STEM and education and who have recently had their grant terminated or cancelled by NSF. Deadlines are May 30, 2025 and June 13, 2025. 

On May 3, the Trump Administration released preliminary, high-level details of its fiscal year (FY) 2026 budget request, referred to as a “skinny budget,” and accompanying fact sheets. In the preliminary request, the Trump Administration reiterates its commitment to “reducing waste” and “improving efficiency” through targeting programs that support diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives, climate change, green energy, and other topics that have been deemed “woke” by the Administration. Full budget details are expected in the upcoming weeks.

As reported in the leaked Health and Human Services (HHS) passback, the budget proposes $27 billion for the National Institutes of Health (NIH), a 40 percent decrease from FY 2025. The proposal also includes a reorganization of the institutes and centers (ICs) into five new focus areas: the National Institute on Body Systems Research; National Institute on Neuroscience and Brain Research; National Institute of General Medical Sciences; National Institute of Disability Related Research; and the National Institute on Behavioral Health. Some ICs would be eliminated under the proposal, including the National Institute on Minority and Health Disparities. The budget proposes retaining the Advanced Research Projects Agency for Health (ARPA-H) under this new structure. The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) was proposed to receive $4 billion in funding for FY 2026, a 44 percent cut from the FY 2025 level.

In a fact sheet titled “Cuts to Woke Programs,” President Trump targeted the National Science Foundation (NSF) with a 57 percent or $5.2 billion cut to their budget, proposing only $3.9 billion for FY 2026. This comes after NSF terminated hundreds of grants and the resignation of NSF Director, Sethuraman Panchanathan (see previous COSSA coverage). The budget also takes aim at “woke social, behavioral, and economic sciences”, targeting specific grants from various institutions, and proposes eliminating “all DEI-related programs” at the agency, which the Administration has already taken steps to do in recent weeks (see related article).

On May 3, a group of former NSF Directors and former Chairs of the National Science Board sent a letter to Congressional Appropriators criticizing the President’s FY 2026 budget request for NSF, especially in light of the scientific priorities laid out in a memo the President sent to his Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) Michael Kratsios. In it they state:

“We believe these challenges can be met, but not with the draconian budget plan and staffing reductions just released by OMB…. Achieving the President’s vision requires a major enhancement of the NSF budget, ideally a doubling of the FY25 level over the next few years and sufficient staff to execute this vision. In the current political climate, we know this is a bold request. We make it, nonetheless, to say — if we truly wish to realize this vision, we must commit to a historic investment in fundamental research and education in a manner that leaves no doubt about the United States’ intentions with our international competitors.”

Congressional oversight hearings will begin in the weeks ahead featuring Trump Administration officials defending the President’s budget request. Stay tuned to COSSA’s continued coverage on the appropriations process.

COSSA congratulates the 150 newly elected fellows of the National Academy of Sciences, including the social and behavioral scientists from COSSA member institutions:

• Steven T. Berry, Department of Economics, Yale University
• Phoebe C. Ellsworth, Department of Psychology and School of Law, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor
• Alison Gopnik, Department of Psychology, University of California, Berkeley
• David B. Grusky, Department of Sociology, Stanford University
• Jun S. Liu, Department of Statistics, Harvard University
• Daniel S. Nagin, Heinz College of Information Systems and Public Policy, Carnegie Mellon University
• Scott Page, Ross School of Business, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor
• Parag A. Pathak, Department of Economics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
• James W. Pennebaker, Department of Psychology, University of Texas, Austin
• Marilyn N. Raphael, Department of Geography, University of California, Los Angeles
• Cecilia L. Ridgeway, Department of Sociology, Stanford University
• Mary C. Stiner, School of Anthropology, University of Arizona

Congratulations and thank you for your contributions to social and behavioral science research!

The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) has established a committee on Improving the Regulatory Efficiency and Reducing Administrative Workload to Strengthen Competitiveness and Productivity of U.S. Research. The second meeting on the committee is scheduled for May 21-23.

The Committee is tasked with producing a fast-track, brief consensus report that includes options for federal actions to improve regulatory efficiency. To help inform this work, the Committee is seeking responses to a brief survey in which researchers can share their experiences with administrative burden and offer ideas for regulatory report. The survey is available here.