Democrats May Struggle to Reverse Trump's Science Cuts Even With Midterm Win, Ex-Nsf Official Warns

Even a Democratic victory in next month's US midterm elections may not be enough to reverse the disruption to American science under Donald Trump, according to former National Science Foundation manager Joel Widder. After 20 years at the agency, Widder became a lobbyist and is now retired. He told Science that much will depend on whether research becomes one of the Democrats' highest priorities.

'It's one thing to be a cheerleader for science,' Widder said. 'But will it be one of the Democrats' top five priorities? If not, it's going to be very hard to overturn what Trump has done.' Voters go to the polls on 3 November, with many researchers hoping a shift in Congress will increase scrutiny of the administration.

Oversight Powers Would Not Guarantee Policy Reversal

Science's report describes an administration record that includes cancelling billions of dollars in research grants, redirecting money already appropriated by Congress, reducing staffing at science agencies including the NSF and National Institutes of Health, and eliminating dozens of outside scientific advisory bodies.

Some of those changes could be difficult to reverse, particularly where agencies have already taken action. New legislation could also face a presidential veto, requiring a two-thirds majority in both chambers of Congress to override it.

Winning the House would nevertheless give Democrats greater oversight powers, including the ability to hold hearings and issue subpoenas. Representative Zoe Lofgren, the senior Democrat on the House Science Committee, has already pressed Energy Secretary Chris Wright over the cancellation of Department of Energy awards.

Lawmakers Seek Review of Wright's Testimony

On 4 August, Lofgren and Representative Gabe Amo referred Wright to the Justice Department, alleging that he had given false testimony concerning approximately $7.5 billion (£5.7 billion) in DOE awards cancelled in October 2025.

Their referral contrasted Wright's 10 June testimony before the House Science Committee with statements made in federal court proceedings about the basis for the terminations.

The Energy Department rejected the accusation. A spokesperson said Wright's testimony was correct and that none of the termination decisions was based on political considerations.

The referral asked the Justice Department to review the matter and pursue charges if warranted. It did not establish that Wright had committed an offence.

Lame-Duck Talks May Offer an Opening

Democrats' leverage could come during lame-duck negotiations over fiscal-year 2027 funding. Congress will return after the election with a funding decision still pending ahead of an 11 December deadline.

Those negotiations will involve the outgoing Congress. Any oversight powers gained by a new Democratic majority would come after the next Congress takes office in January.

Separately, the current stopgap funding measure delays implementation of a proposed OMB rule changing federal grant administration until 11 December. It also maintains federal funding largely at existing levels while Congress negotiates a longer-term agreement.

Senators Oppose Reported NIH Oversight Plan

Collins and Senator Patty Murray, the senior Democrat on the Senate Appropriations Committee, opposed a reported White House plan for an oversight council that would have given Office of Management and Budget Director Russell Vought veto power over NIH research grants.

Collins warned the administration not to proceed, while Murray condemned the reported plan as an attempt to politicise medical research. The American Institute of Physics reported in September that the administration had backed away from the proposal, at least for now.

The White House disputed the reporting, telling AIP that the reports were 'baseless speculation' and that the administration remained committed to NIH's core mission.

Election Win Would Not Mean an Immediate Reset

Even if Congress blocks proposed changes to grantmaking rules, Widder told Science that agencies other than perhaps NIH should not expect major increases in fiscal-year 2027 research spending.

The election therefore may not produce an immediate reset for US science. A Democratic majority could strengthen congressional oversight and influence future spending decisions, but restoring cancelled grants, agency staffing and disrupted research programmes could take longer.

Congress faces an 11 December funding deadline, before the new Congress takes office in January. The current stopgap measure also delays implementation of the proposed OMB grant rule until that date, leaving both research funding and the rule's next steps subject to further congressional decisions.