Alec Simantov
Alec is a Director in the McAllister & Quinn Research Universities Practice. Alec leverages his expertise on the federal budget and Congress to provide strategic intelligence and oversight on legislative and policy developments, focusing on R&D, science, and higher education policy.
The President’s budget request for science agencies continues to undercut federal support for R&D. Will Congress step-in again to save agency budgets?
The White House released its fiscal year 2027 (FY27) budget request on April 3, 2026. Shortly thereafter, federal agencies began releasing their detailed congressional justifications highlighting proposed programmatic funding and policy changes for the upcoming fiscal year. The White House’s proposals for science agency toplines look quite similar to its FY26 request, including near identical proposed cuts to agencies like NSF, NASA, NOAA, NIST, and the DOE Office of Science among others. The administration’s proposal for a $6 billion cut to NIH in FY27, instead of the $20 billion cut it proposed last year, may reflect the White House’s begrudging acceptance of the continued bipartisan popularity of biomedical research funding among congressional appropriators, who responded to last year’s proposed cut with a $216 million increase to the overall NIH budget.
Large Funding Cuts to Science Agencies Remain Unpopular with Congress
Early reactions from Congress and activity in the House Appropriations Committee this past month, demonstrate that steep proposed cuts to science agencies remains deeply unpopular with Congress, including Republicans. Senate Appropriations Chair Susan Collins (R-ME) called the proposed cuts to NIH “unwarranted” reminding the administration that it is Congress that holds the “power of the purse” when it comes to federal funding. Additionally, 102 members of Congress signed a bipartisan letter calling for $9 billion in funding for NASA’s Science Mission Directorate (SMD) in FY27. House appropriators are recommending $6 billion for SMD in FY27 rejecting the administration’s proposed cuts to NASA for a second year in a row.
The work of the House Appropriations Committee so far on FY27 appropriations mirrors its markup proposals for FY26. The committee already marked up and approved its funding bill for USDA with $1.65 billion for NIFA, comparable to the FY26 enacted level. The subcommittee approved funding bill for the Commerce-Justice-Science title (which funds NSF, NASA, NIST, and NOAA) reflects similar funding levels to its FY26 proposal. The Senate Appropriations Committee has yet to release the drafts of its own funding bills, which are expected in the coming weeks. Last year, the Senate proposed generally higher toplines for science agencies than the House, and the resulting compromise generally left FY26 funding flat compared to FY25, with some slight reductions at some agencies like NSF.
Senate Appropriations Chair Susan Collins (R-ME) called the proposed cuts to NIH "unwarranted" reminding the administration that it is Congress that holds the "power of the purse."
We’ve Seen Congress and the Courts Intervene Before...Will that Continue?
Many of the administration’s other proposals for FY27 are likely to be rejected by Congress again. The White House continues to propose a 15% flat rate for indirect costs at NIH, a proposal Congress has routinely rejected since President Trump first proposed a cap on indirect costs in his first term. A federal appeals court injunction on implementing the cap at NIH is now permanent. The proposal to reorganize and consolidate agencies within HHS, including another proposed consolidation of NIH institutes and centers, will fail to gain traction with congressional appropriators as NIH reforms in Congress will be addressed through a future agency reauthorization bill and not the annual appropriations process. Once again, even with unified GOP control of both chambers, Congress remains opposed to the White House’s recycled proposals.
What Will Happen Come October?
As in previous years, Congress will likely need to pass a continuing resolution to avoid a government shutdown once FY27 begins on October 1 (which neither party wants heading into elections), and with Congress on recess in October for campaigning, FY27 funding levels will not be finalized until after the midterm elections in November. Should either chamber switch control to Democrats, Republicans will likely look to finalize FY27 funding before the new Congress is seated in early January. McAllister & Quinn will continue to track the outcomes of appropriations markups and trends we’re seeing throughout the remainder of the year.
