Nature wrote a letter for Donald Trump, discussing how to make science thrive
The United States as a leader in fundamental science: What can you learn from the recent environmental crises? Why should the US government care about climate change and energy security?
On January 20th you will be sworn in as President of the United States. You have won and I would like to congratulate you. A majority of US voters trust you. That is a tremendous responsibility.
As you prepare to return to the White House, we urge you not to lose sight of the need for the US government to continue to provide support for researchers — especially in terms of fundamental science and the opportunity for researchers to collaborate with peers around the world. You should examine the evidence before making a new policy announcement.
The US has been a world-leading for generations when it comes to research and innovation. The work of scientists underpins health and prosperity. The US$3-billion investment into the Human Genome Project has changed our understanding of diseases. Within a decade of the project’s completion, it had added an estimated $1 trillion to the US economy.
Climate and energy security need to be priorities. Humans are warming the planet and there is no question about it. The researchers consensus is that all nations are vulnerable to severe disruptions from continued burning of fossil fuels.
The most recent example is the devastating wildfires seen in California this month, which are likely due to disruptive climatic effects. Wildfire smoke is a serious health hazard. Many important policies designed to protect people from the effects of climate change, including investment in new energy sources, are in place in the United States. Your administration has an opportunity and a responsibility to build on this work.
The United States can’t address climate change or health issues on its own. When appropriate, the country must lead other nations through global organizations and agreements that it has helped to establish. International accords can be reformed despite being complicated and imperfect. The alternative — of not having them or withdrawing from them — will put the United States and the rest of the world at greater risk. We hope you will engage. Global cooperation is the only way to solve global problems.
Slashing public sector spending and improving government efficiency are two things that you’ve signaled a desire for in government reform. Researchers are frustrated with various aspects of the government, for instance how research funds are allocated. They’re worried that overly cautious rules might be slowing down the roll out of life-saving treatments.
We feel that you should consult with the widest possible range of stakeholders, including those who have experience with the problems you are trying to solve, as well as those who study them. This will provide the best chance of reaching optimal solutions. Useful insights will come from industry. Companies have experience in experimenting with process innovation and feel the impact of poorly thought out regulations. We encourage you to contact the research departments of regulatory bodies, as well as organizations that represent consumers and patients’ groups.
Climate and environment are areas where scientists are anticipating the worst. In his first term, Trump was expected to roll back or loosen regulations on pollution, but he has argued that they hurt the economy. The EPA is likely to be the hardest hit by attempts to cut costs and staff, while other agencies such as NASA could also be targets for cuts.
NASA isn’t sure how the science programmes will fare under a Trump administration. The man who packed 36 experiments onto his recent space flight is a supporter of space science. He tried to convince NASA to allow him to use a vehicle to boost the Hubble Space Telescope’s capacity. NASA is a major funding source for Earth-science studies and those programmes could be at risk if Trump goes along with his plan to cut climate research.
Biden followed with his 2023 executive order on AI. It mandated the creation of an AI Safety Institute and a National AI Research Resource pilot project, a system for sharing computing power, data sets and algorithms to facilitate academic and small-business AI work. These initiatives are unclear at the moment. Trump believes Biden’s order hinders innovation because it restricts the use of artificial intelligence. The US National Institute of Standards and Technology has been targeted by budget cuts in the past. Policy researchers expect that Trump’s future executive orders will strengthen the federal use of AI for national security and military uses.
Trump has been critical of Biden’s bipartisan 2022 CHIPS and Science Act, which authorized billions of dollars to boost US semiconductor manufacturing, saying that imposing tariffs on commercial rivals in China could achieve the same goal for free. Charles Wessner, who studies science and technology policy at the Georgetown University in Washington DC, says that Donald Trump is unlikely to gut the act because of its contribution to local economies and jobs.
Some researchers are worried that companies will police themselves in the future if they are left to do it. In a recent interview, a philosopher with the Center for Artificial Intelligence Safety in San Francisco, California said he was in favour of strong action from the federal government on artificial intelligence regulation. It was not likely that Democrat candidate Kamala Harris would win. It is a joke under Trump.
Astrophysical Implications of Donald Trump’s Plan for a Return of Humanoid Space Flights to the Moon: The Effects on the Interior of the United States
The main goal of NASA is to send astronauts to the moon. For that effort, it built a new heavy-lift rocket, the Space Launch System (SLS), and a crew capsule named Orion. But the SLS costs more than $4 billion per launch and is not reusable. The Trump administration could try to convince Congress to stop the rocket programme, and use private companies like the one run by Musk to make up the difference.
NASA’s plans to send astronauts to Mars in the 2040s might also accelerate. Musk has expressed a strong desire for humans to colonize Mars, and he will probably try to influence NASA to get there sooner using SpaceX’s Starship vehicle, say space-policy researchers. So NASA might be pressured to get astronauts to the Moon quickly, and then pivot to Mars. “I believe we’re still going to get a lunar landing,” says Laura Forczyk, executive director of space-consulting firm Astralytical in Palm Bay, Florida. We don’t know whether or not Artemis continues into the future.
Major changes may be advocated by Trump if he is confirmed as NASA administrator. Isaacman paid SpaceX to fly him on two commercial space missions, and has spoken about what he regards as waste and delays in government contracting projects.
The Trump administration is working to return humans to the moon by 2024 and China is working on plans to send astronauts there.
“Trump’s plans for EPA are a five-alarm fire, and the health of millions of Americans hangs in the balance,” says Jeremy Symons, an adviser to the Environmental Protection Network, a non-profit organization of former EPA officials in Washington DC that was established during Trump’s first term.
Lee Zeldin is a long-time supporter of Trump and has a mixed record on supporting the EPA budget. If he is confirmed, policy analysts believe he will roll back pollution regulations and reduce staff at the agency.
Chris Wright, who was tapped by Trump to lead the DoE, is an oil industry executive. Thomas Hochman, director of policy at the Foundation for American Innovation in San Francisco, said that Wright could fade into the background when it comes to federal investments in clean energy demonstration projects.
If trade wars are exacerbated by Trump, it will ultimately slow the development of climate-friendly technologies, says David Victor, a political scientist at the University of California, San Diego. This is the location where a second Trump administration could cause harm.