Packalen is an associate professor of economics at the University of Waterloo. This essay is part of a First Opinion series on the future of the National Institutes of Health and American science.

A quiet policy change means the government is making fewer bets on long-term science. By Aatish Bhatia, Amy Fan, Jonah Smith and Irena Hwang In the past decade, the National Institutes of Health ...

In 2025, more than 3,800 research grants from the National Institutes of Health and the National Science Foundation were terminated or frozen as part of the Trump administration’s effort to realign ...

Congress moved to undo proposed cuts to federal scientific and public health research funding Jan. 9, which may increase Georgetown University students’ access to community-based health initiatives ...

It’s pretty obvious at this point that the Trump administration is waging a full-scale assault on US science. It has proposed budgets that would be catastrophic, stopped the flow of research funds to ...

Congressional appropriators mostly ignored the Trump administration’s requests to slash budgets at several science and data agencies in a package of fiscal year 2026 bills released this week. While ...

You have /3 articles left. Sign up for a free account or log in. The National Science Foundation and National Institutes of Health doled out about as much total grant ...

Scientists are philosophers, explorers, data collectors and number crunchers. They are also storytellers, placing data within a broader scientific and societal context. How they tell these stories ...

Which political party provides more federal funding for science? Given climate-denial rhetoric, attacks on expertise, the size of government, and culture-war battles over research, many Americans may ...