Take a closer look at your phone or tablet. Touch screen technology, voice recognition, digital sound recording and the Internet are all developed using funds from the National Science Foundation.
No matter where you live, NSF-supported research also makes your life safer. Engineering research reduces earthquake damage and death through better architectural design. Improved hurricane and tornado forecasts reflect NSF's investment in environmental monitoring and computer modeling of weather. NSF-backed resilience studies reduce the risk and loss of wildfires.
Using NSF grants, scientists conducted surprising, entertaining and engaging research. They have drilled the mile-thick ice caps to learn about the past, visiting the wreckage of the Titanic and captured deep space images.
NSF investments make American and American science great. At least 268 Nobel Prize winners have received NSF grants throughout their careers. The foundation has worked with government agencies since its inception, including those dealing with national security and space exploration. The Fed estimates that since 1950, the return on investment for government-backed research by the NSF and other institutions has been 150% to 300%, meaning that every dollar invested by U.S. taxpayers, their earnings range between $1.50 and $3.
However, the fund is in danger now.
Since January, layoffs, leadership resignations and massively proposed restructuring have threatened the integrity and mission of the National Science Foundation. Hundreds of research grants have been terminated. The government’s proposed federal budget for fiscal year 2026 will reduce NSF funding by 55%, an unprecedented reduction, which will end federal support for scientific research in a wide range of disciplines.
In my own geological laboratory, I have seen NSF awarded catalytic research as well as the work of dozens of students that have collected data that are now used to reduce the risks of earthquakes, floods, landslides, erosion, sea level rise and melting glaciers.
I have also served on the NSF’s advisory committee and review team over the past 30 years and have seen the value of the foundation to the American people.
The greatness of American science comes from war
In the 1940s, with the advent of nuclear weapons, the space race, and the intensification of the Cold War, American scientific and engineering expertise became increasingly important to national defense. At that time, most basic and applied research was done by the military.
Electrical engineer Vannevar Bush oversees military research work during World War II, including the development of the atomic bomb, had a different idea.
He illuminates the United States’ broad scientific vision in the field of science: endless boundaries. The report is a blueprint for the American Research Royal Family based on university faculty, faculty and graduate expertise.
On May 10, 1950, after five years of debate and compromise, President Harry Truman signed legislation, created the National Science Foundation, and put Bush's vision into practice. Since then, the Foundation has become a major funder of basic research in the United States.
At the time, the NSF was tasked with supporting basic research and funding for science communication in all 50 states. Expanding the scientific workforce in the United States is and remains an integral part of the prosperity of the United States. By 1952, the foundation awarded scholarships to graduate and postdoctoral scientists in various states.
There is a compromise. The control of the NSF was disappointing in the case of presidential appointment. He hopes scientists avoid political intervention in the Foundation's research agenda.
NSF funds are important to everyone
Today, the U.S. taxation that supports science goes to every state in the alliance.
The states that awarded the most NSF grants between 2011 and 2024 include several votes for Republicans in the 2024 election — Texas, Florida, Michigan, North Carolina and Pennsylvania — and some votes for Democrats, including Massachusetts, New York, Virginia and Colorado.
More than 1,800 public and private institutions scattered in all 50 states received NSF funding. Grants pay employees, faculty and students, promote local employment and support university towns and cities. For states with major research universities, these grants total hundreds of millions of dollars per year. Even states with few universities have seen tens of millions of dollars in research.
These dollars support regional and national economies as recipients of NSF grants to purchase laboratory supplies and services.
When the NSF budget is cut and terminated or grants are never ruled, the harm can drip and the community suffers. The initial NSF funding cuts have rippled across the country, affecting national and local economies in red, blue and purple countries.
Analysis of the February 2025 proposal, which will cut approximately $5.5 billion from the National Institutes of Health grant, is estimated to cost $6.1 billion through the effect of the ripple effect of the university town and supply chain, with GDP or gross national productivity exceeding 46,000.
The uncertain future of American science
American scientific research and training companies have been bipartisan support for decades. However, as NSF celebrates its 75th birthday, the future of American science is doubtful. As Bush feared 80 years ago, funding is becoming increasingly uncertain and politics is driving decision-making.
The list of grants terminated by the Trump administration, collected from government websites and scientists themselves, shows that by early May 2025, the NSF stopped more than 1,400 existing grant funds, totaling more than $1 billion in research, research training and education.
Most of the terminated grants focus on education - the core development of science, technology and engineering workers is essential to providing highly skilled workers to U.S. companies. For example, NSF offers 1,000 graduate scholarships in 2025, which is a 50% drop in support from the best science majors in the United States.
American scientists are responding to the reduction of NSF in various ways. Some people retreat by challenging the grant termination. Others are preparing to leave the science or academia. Some may move abroad and make offers from other countries to recruit U.S. experts. Six previous heads of the Science Organization and NSF are calling on Congress to strengthen and maintain funding for scientific research and workforce development.
If these losses continue, the number of next-generation American scientists will be reduced, ready to meet the needs of the population facing more extreme weather threats, future pandemics, and growth restrictions imposed by limited natural resources and other planetary restrictions.
Investment in science and engineering is an investment in the United States. The NSF and its scientific reductions in support will harm the U.S. economy and the lives of all Americans.