House Republicans Propose Cutting Science Budgets, but by Less than Trump

Republicans in the House have proposed cuts to several science agencies in the recently published Commerce, Justice, Science appropriations bill for fiscal year 2027, but the cuts fall far short of those proposed by the White House.

The House Appropriations Commerce-Justice-Science Subcommittee advanced the bill on April 30 by an 8-6 vote, with all Republicans supporting and all Democrats opposing. A full committee markup session is scheduled for May 13. The Senate has not yet released any bill texts. Congress has until Oct. 1 to reach an agreement on the appropriations bills, or risk a lapse in funding.

Ahead of the vote to advance the proposal last week, Republican committee members, including Appropriations Committee Chair Tom Cole (R-OK) and CJS Subcommittee Chair Hal Rogers (R-KY), spoke about the importance of investing in science and staying ahead of China, with both praising the recent success of NASA’s Artemis II mission.

Democrats criticized the bill during the markup session. House Appropriations Committee Ranking Member Rosa DeLauro (D-CT) said the proposal “weakens our scientific competitiveness by cutting billions of dollars from scientific research, technology development, and STEM education across the National Science Foundation, NASA, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology.” Other Democrats on the committee also pressed the need for more funding for science agencies, particularly for NASA’s Science Mission Directorate.

National Aeronautics and Space Administration

The House Appropriations Committee proposes level funding for NASA overall, at $24.4 billion. The Trump administration’s budget request proposes $18.8 billion for the space agency, a 23% cut. Rogers said during the CJS markup that the House bill “maintains strong levels of funding for NASA.”

“With the recent success of Artemis II, it is a critical time to invest in human space exploration and ensure that American astronauts are the first to return to the Moon. With its sights on Mars, NASA will lead the way to the next frontier and safeguard our national security by ensuring America maintains a competitive advantage over China,” Rogers said.

While the Trump administration proposes approximately halving SMD funding from $7.3 billion to $3.9 billion, the House proposes a budget of roughly $6 billion — an 18% cut. CJS Subcommittee Ranking Member Grace Meng (D-NY) said the reductions would be “shortsighted.”

“I disagree with this bill’s approach,” Meng said during the markup. “As I have said repeatedly, I believe we should be doubling down on the investments in science that grow our economy and incentivize advancements that improve life for all Americans.”

National Science Foundation

The House proposes funding NSF at $7 billion, a 20% cut, while the Trump administration requested around $4 billion — a more than 50% cut that would reduce funding across NSF’s directorates — including a 67% cut to the Mathematical and Physical Sciences Directorate and 58% to the Geosciences Directorate, as well as the elimination of much of the agency’s social and behavioral sciences funding. The House proposal includes $6.4 billion for research and related activities (down 10% from last year) and $173 million for major research equipment and facilities, down 31%.

Organizations such as the American Association of Universities have stated that the House’s proposed budget for NSF, though more generous than the Trump administration’s request, is insufficient to keep up with competition from China, which recently overtook the U.S. in R&D spending. AAU noted, however, that it was pleased to see that the House preserved language from last year’s bill instructing science agencies to keep indirect cost rates for research at fiscal year 2024 levels.

The Coalition for National Science Funding and other science groups are advocating for an NSF budget of $9.9 billion, which they argue would return the agency to fiscal year 2023 funding levels. “To keep America at the cutting edge of science, NSF must maintain critical infrastructure—such as top-rated physics and astronomy observatories and the nascent National AI Research Resource (currently in a small pilot phase)—as well as invest in major new facilities,” CNSF said in a letter to House appropriators shared on its website.

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

The House is recommending a total NOAA budget of $5.85 billion — a roughly 5% cut, compared to the Trump administration’s proposed 28% cut. The administration’s proposal includes major cuts to long-term scientific work, including climate monitoring, ocean and atmospheric modeling, and university-based research partnerships, reflecting a desire to focus on operations and move away from environmental research.

The House proposal includes $4.07 billion for NOAA’s Operations, Research, and Facilities account, an 11% cut that is far shallower than the 26% cut proposed by the administration. As happened last year, the Trump administration’s request includes a call to eliminate the Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research, which oversees the agency’s laboratories and cooperative institutes.

NOAA’s budget request says that eliminating OAR would streamline program management and align research closer to operations. In a recent House Science Committee hearing on the agency’s budget proposal, NOAA Administrator Neil Jacobs said some of OAR’s research activities would be transferred to other offices within the agency, noting there are “not any areas necessarily that would be abandoned,” adding, “some would be accelerated.” Jacobs acknowledged, however, that many extramural grants supporting research at universities would be cut.

Both Republicans and Democrats in the House have warned that eliminating OAR would undermine NOAA’s forecasting accuracy — a major priority for many members of Congress whose constituents may be impacted by severe weather events. While the Trump administration suggests flat funding for the National Weather Service — which it is currently reorganizing — the House proposal would increase it. The House bill also specifically calls for staffing levels at the NWS to be maintained.

National Institute of Standards and Technology

Under the House proposal, NIST would receive around $1 billion, a $160 million cut from its 2026 budget. The Trump administration proposes a budget of $854 million, with no budget for earmarks (also known as congressionally directed spending) and significant cuts to the agency’s Scientific and Technical Research and Services account. The Trump administration’s budget request said cuts at NIST are necessary to slash “wasteful spending” at the agency, which it accused of having a “radical climate agenda.” Both the House and the Trump administration have proposed $88 million for NIST’s construction account, down from $386 million in 2026. The administration’s proposal would eliminate funding for congressionally directed research facility construction, which had a budget of $258 million last year. It would also reduce the Safety, Capacity, Maintenance, and Major Repair (SCMMR) Program budget by $40 million, returning it to 2025 funding levels. A 2023 National Academies report that assessed infrastructure needs across NIST concluded the agency would need around $500 million per year for at least 12 years to comprehensively repair and modernize the agency’s infrastructure.