McNutt warns – National Academy of Sciences president Marcia McNutt says U.S. science has been hit by turmoil in policy and funding, with uncertainty over federal support, downsizing, and an exodus of federal employees. She warns that without innovation and stronger ties bet
Marcia McNutt walked into the annual State of the Science address in Washington, D.C., with a message that sounded less like a speech and more like a warning. “The past year has been filled with turmoil” in science policy, the president of the National Academy of Sciences said on Tuesday.
She pointed first to what’s been hardest to plan around: “uncertainty” over federal support for science. In her account. that uncertainty has piled on top of “abrupt downsizing” of science agencies. a mass exodus of federal employees. and the draining reality that “the world’s top scientific minds are leaving the U.S.”.
McNutt didn’t frame it as abstract competition. She framed it as a reversal of something the U.S. used to do naturally. “We always were the country where STEM talent came to us. ” she said. referring to science. technology. engineering and math fields. “Now we are exporting our science talent elsewhere.”.
After about 10 years as president of NAS, McNutt plans to step down on June 30.
Her argument—how to keep science resilient and competitive—landed on two fronts. One was about how researchers move through the real world of funding and careers. The other was about how they respond when policy begins to intrude.
“We must consider what is in our power, as a research community, to improve while, at the same time, pushing back against inappropriate political interference in research,” she said, acknowledging how demoralizing this moment can feel for scientists.
That tension has been visible in federal policy in recent months. Since President Donald Trump took office last year, McNutt described U.S. science as a target for funding cuts, firings, and intense regulatory scrutiny. One estimate cited in her remarks put the number of federal employees at scientific agencies who were either fired or left public office in his second term at around 100. 000.
Funding cuts have also reached specific science grants. She cited a Nature analysis published in January that found nearly 8. 000 scientific grants—mostly from the National Institutes of Health and the National Science Foundation—had been cut (McNutt noted that some grants have since been reinstated by the courts). And she pointed to a fresh escalation: “just last week. ” she said. as Scientific American reported. the administration published a proposal to give political appointees final say on grant funding instead of researchers. overturning a decades-long precedent.
“Now, what could possibly go wrong with that?” McNutt quipped.
In the face of these pressures, McNutt urged scientists to lean into a practical solution: partnership. To make science more “resilient” and “competitive. ” she said that scientists should partner with industry. and that universities should support researchers who do so. She also urged universities and training programs to prepare students for science-adjacent careers outside academia.
Without bridging the gap between industry and science, she warned, the “best and brightest” students may “shun” careers in science, “domestic talent” will continue to seek opportunities abroad, and the economy will suffer.
But her recommendations immediately ran into pushback from some scientists and science advocates. who argued that the direction of travel is wrong—especially at a time when federal research is under strain. Colette Delawalla. founder and CEO of Stand Up for Science. wrote on Bluesky: “This focus on the private sector as we are facing down complete and total destruction of actual SCIENCE is unreal to me.” Delawalla added: “We are doing publicly-funded free training for companies … this is the selling out of science to the Tech Bros.”.
McNutt also recommended cutting red tape and lowering regulatory hurdles for researchers, along with increasing reliance on artificial intelligence to “increase the rate of discovery.”
Her conclusion was blunt. “Innovation is the only way that the U.S. research enterprise is going to remain at the top globally,” McNutt said. “Innovation shouldn’t just be a lofty aspiration; it should be our baseline expectation for our research enterprise.”
The speech landed in a moment where science policy is not only changing. but actively reshaping careers and decisions—where uncertainty about support. downsizing in agencies. and grant fights are pushing scientists to plan for less and work around more. And with McNutt stepping down on June 30. the question hanging over the room is not only whether innovation can protect the U.S. research system. but whether the rules of funding and influence will make that innovation possible—or keep draining talent out of the country.
Marcia McNutt National Academy of Sciences State of the Science STEM talent federal funding cuts scientific grants NIH NSF political interference innovation artificial intelligence industry partnership research regulation June 30 step down