Funding Cuts to Science

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. PETERS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today because we face a critical moment for American leadership.

Amid mounting pressure to compete with China in energy, biotechnology, and AI dominance, any smart country would invest in itself and invest in the future. Unfortunately, this administration seems committed to doing the exact opposite.

Funding cuts to the National Institutes of Health and the National Science Foundation have kneecapped the world-class research ecosystem that has made America great in the 20th century.

The politicization of science hurts the health and well-being of hardworking American citizens, and it compromises our ability as a nation to compete with other nations.

During August, I held a townhall with hundreds of my constituents who are researchers and graduate students in science, technology, engineering, and math. During the townhall, I discussed the dangers of this administration's agenda for public health, national security, and global competitiveness, and they asked that I tell you some of their stories.

One researcher studies ocean and Earth sciences at San Diego's prestigious Scripps Institution of Oceanography. Her research focuses on addressing the threats that toxic algal blooms pose to public health, fisheries, and coastal recreation.

With cuts to NASA, NOAA, and the National Science Foundation, she has seen labs at Scripps shut down and watched her coworkers lose their jobs.

Another scientist whose research focuses on ensuring energy security has felt the consequences of this administration's policy. She has had her research censored by an administration that is indifferent to and may be hostile to scientific research. She has watched critical datasets and research tools disappear from government websites overnight. As she so aptly put it: ``I have sacrificed so much of my livelihood for the betterment of our planet, only to see it all burn down in less than half a year.''

Myiesha, a researcher at UCSD, overcame her own traumatic brain injuries and chronic illnesses so she could study the effects of infectious diseases on vulnerable patients. Now, Myiesha faces a new challenge: overcoming an administration that has cut her authorized research, cut her working hours almost in half, and cut her income significantly.

Mari is a Ph.D. candidate studying biomedical sciences at UCSD. She researches the neuroscience behind drug addiction so we can fight the opioid crisis. Just as her field gained momentum--overdose deaths declined in 2024 for the first time in over two decades--her lab was threatened with funding cuts. Mari has watched her lifesaving research be halted and had two of her own fellowship applications withdrawn because of the administration's actions.

Eugene is a Ph.D. candidate at Scripps. He is researching how to repurpose bacteria to stop certain cancer-causing proteins. The lab next door to Eugene's was doing a $129 million trial on monkeys, working to develop an HIV vaccine. After the Trump administration canceled the lab's grant, the monkeys were killed needlessly, funding already spent was wasted, and patients will now have to wait even longer before we find an HIV vaccine.

Maya, a UCSD grad, cofounded BrainStorm Therapeutics, a biotech startup researching treatments for brain diseases like Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, and epilepsy. Maya has seen the grants that support startups like hers cut. This threatens the transformational science that she and her colleagues are working on.

The final story I will tell, and maybe the most emblematic of the issue, is that of Dr. Ardem Patapoutian. He is a world-renowned researcher who won the Nobel Prize for his work on researching the sense of touch.

Mr. Speaker, I think we can all agree that is the kind of talent we strive to encourage in this country.

When his research funding was delayed by the Trump administration, Dr. Patapoutian received a call from China within 2 days. They offered him his pick of whatever research institution he wanted in China, guaranteeing his funding for the next 20 years.

Although his funding is still delayed, Dr. Patapoutian chose to stay here because of the world-class research ecosystem in the United States that is currently being eroded and under attack.

These stories show the risks we take when we cut funding that supports critical scientific advancement. China is far outpacing us in the research and development space. If we are going to keep up, we have to put up. If those of us in this body are truly serious about putting America first, this is simply not the way.

It is encouraging that, despite the administration's attempt to politicize science, a bipartisan bloc of the Senate Appropriations Committee has chosen to modestly increase scientific research funding rather than cut it. I am very thankful for that. I hope we will do the same here in the House.

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the commitment to investing in America's future. We in the House should do the same. We need to invest in science and not undercut it.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source