A Senate committee report by minority staff, and obtained by CNN, slams the Trump administration for terminating some funding for research, firing thousands of federal workers and removing certain scientific data from government websites. The Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee’s minority staff report, scheduled to be released Tuesday and authored by Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vermont, says that in the first three months of this year, the Trump administration cut $2.7 billion in National Institutes of Health funding for research. That figure is much higher than some separate estimates that previously suggested targeted grant terminations have affected more than $1.8 billion in NIH funding. The new report, which describes the Trump administration’s actions as a “war on science,” is based on analyses conducted by Senate HELP Committee minority Staff, involving NIH grant funding data as well as HHS self-reported spreadsheets and other sources. The 15-page report warns that the administration’s actions “will lead to fewer breakthroughs for diseases like cancer, a weaker public health response against future infectious disease threats, and a continued decline in trust in public institutions,” and it calls for an end to the research funding cuts. The committee is publishing the report the day before it will hold a hearing with US Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. to discuss President Donald Trump’s proposed budget for the US Department of Health and Human Services for fiscal year 2026. One analysis finds that federal funding to support cancer research was cut 31% from January through March compared with the same timeframe last year. “The American people do not want us to slash cancer research in order to give more tax breaks for billionaires,” Sanders said in an emailed statement about the new report. “Let’s be clear. Trump’s war on science is not making America healthy again. It is making Americans and people throughout the world sicker,” he said. “This must end. Congress, the scientific community, and the American people must stand up and fight back.” According to the new report, some of the canceled NIH grants were intended to support not only cancer research but Alzheimer’s disease research, cardiovascular disease studies, diabetes science and infectious disease clinical trials. The categories of infectious disease, mental and behavioral health, neurology and aging, maternal and reproductive health, and cancer account for nearly $700 million of NIH funding that has been terminated, according to the new report. The Trump administration has been conducting a restructuring of HHS as well as a review of funding, resulting in the abrupt pause or cancellation of some NIH research grants. Part of the restructuring involves consolidating the 28 agencies of HHS into 15 new divisions, including the new Administration for a Healthy America. The transformation of HHS also shifts the department’s focus to addressing chronic diseases in the US. “At HHS, we are dedicated to restoring our agencies to their tradition of upholding gold-standard, evidence-based science. As we begin to Make America Healthy Again, it’s important to prioritize research that directly affects the health of Americans,” HHS spokesperson Andrew Nixon said in an email. “We will leave no stone unturned in identifying the root causes of the chronic disease epidemic as part of our mission to Make America Healthy Again.” Many of the NIH grant pauses and terminations have been tied to the Trump administration’s orders for research and institutions to comply with its rules around diversity, equity and inclusion in order to receive federal funding. Just hours into his second term, Trump signed an anti-DEI mandate declaring diversity, equity and inclusion efforts and language to be discriminatory. Concerns around staffing, data The new Senate committee minority report also raises concerns about access to scientific data and reductions in HHS staffing. An analysis in the report finds that, since January 20, at least 175 public health datasets from the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s website and 135 datasets from a central HHS data portal have been deleted. In February, the organization Doctors for America filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration, seeking a temporary restraining order to restore websites and datasets. A judge granted the motion for a temporary restraining order, but Trump officials have added a disclaimer to the websites, “falsely suggesting the datasets are inaccurate,” according to the new report. The report also notes that, based on public reports, “at least 10,000 employees at HHS agencies have been terminated and an additional 10,000 have retired, quit, or been forced out by the administration.” When plans for the restructuring of HHS were announced in late March, Kennedy described them as an effort to allow the department to do more at a lower cost to taxpayers. “We aren’t just reducing bureaucratic sprawl. We are realigning the organization with its core mission and our new priorities in reversing the chronic disease epidemic,” he said at the time. “This overhaul will be a win-win for taxpayers and for those that HHS serves.” Trump administration officials have not provided the Senate HELP Minority Staff with “any details in writing about the mass firings” at the agencies, according to the new report.
First on CNN: Trump administration cut $2.7 billion in NIH research funding through March, Senate committee minority report says
TruthLens AI Suggested Headline:
"Senate Committee Report Criticizes Trump Administration for $2.7 Billion NIH Funding Cuts"
CNN
6.4
TruthLens AI Summary
A recent report by the minority staff of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, authored by Senator Bernie Sanders, criticizes the Trump administration for significant cuts to research funding, specifically noting a $2.7 billion reduction in National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding in the first three months of the year. This figure surpasses prior estimates which indicated a $1.8 billion impact from targeted grant terminations. The report characterizes these actions as part of a broader 'war on science,' warning that such funding cuts will hinder advancements in critical areas such as cancer research, infectious disease response, and public trust in governmental institutions. Furthermore, the report highlights a 31% decrease in federal funding for cancer research compared to the same period last year, calling for an immediate cessation of these cuts. Sanders expressed that the American public does not support the idea of slashing vital health research to provide tax breaks to the wealthy, asserting that the administration's policies are detrimental to public health both domestically and globally.
In addition to funding cuts, the report raises alarms about the accessibility of scientific data and staffing reductions within the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). It points to the deletion of at least 175 public health datasets from the CDC and 135 from HHS, which has sparked legal action from advocacy groups aiming to restore access to this information. Staffing levels have also plummeted, with reports indicating that around 20,000 employees have either been terminated or resigned since Trump took office. The restructuring efforts at HHS aim to consolidate various agencies into fewer divisions, which the administration claims will enhance efficiency and focus on chronic diseases. However, the report suggests that these changes, coupled with a mandate against diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives, have further complicated the landscape of public health research and data availability. The upcoming Senate hearing with HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. is expected to address these issues, particularly in light of the proposed budget for fiscal year 2026.
TruthLens AI Analysis
The report highlights significant concerns regarding the Trump administration's impact on scientific research funding, particularly through cuts to the National Institutes of Health (NIH). It aims to portray the administration's actions as detrimental to public health and scientific progress, emphasizing a narrative of a "war on science." This framing is intended to resonate with audiences who prioritize health research and scientific integrity.
Perception Management
The report seeks to create a perception of urgency and alarm around the funding cuts. By stating that these reductions could lead to fewer medical breakthroughs and weaken public health responses, it aims to mobilize public sentiment against the administration's policies. The use of strong language, such as "war on science," serves to evoke emotional responses from readers and position the Trump administration negatively in the public eye.
Potential Concealments
While the report focuses on funding cuts, it may divert attention from other political or economic issues at play during that time. The timing of the report's release, ahead of a hearing with Secretary of Health and Human Services, suggests a strategic effort to influence the discussion around the proposed budget for the Department of Health and Human Services.
Manipulative Elements
The report exhibits a certain degree of manipulativeness, particularly through its choice of language and framing. By labeling actions as a "war on science," it targets emotions and could lead to a polarized view of the Trump administration. The report's selective presentation of facts aims to bolster its argument and may oversimplify complex issues surrounding budget allocations and public health funding.
Reliability of the Information
The information presented in the report appears to be based on analyses of NIH funding data and other credible sources, giving it a foundation of reliability. However, the framing and language used could skew the interpretation of the facts, potentially diminishing the overall trustworthiness of the narrative being conveyed.
Target Audience
The report likely appeals to communities that prioritize scientific advancement and public health, such as healthcare professionals, researchers, and concerned citizens. By emphasizing the potential human cost of funding cuts, it seeks to resonate with those who value research and medical progress.
Market Impact
In terms of market implications, significant cuts to NIH funding could affect stocks related to biotechnology and pharmaceuticals, potentially leading to volatility in those sectors. Companies heavily reliant on federal research grants might be viewed as riskier investments, impacting their stock prices.
Geopolitical Ramifications
While this report primarily focuses on domestic issues, it does touch upon broader themes of scientific integrity and public health that can have international implications. Countries observing the U.S. approach to science funding may draw conclusions impacting global health collaborations or scientific partnerships.
Use of AI in Reporting
It is plausible that AI tools were used to analyze data for this report, especially in parsing through NIH funding statistics. AI might have contributed to identifying trends or generating summaries of complex data sets. However, the narrative seems to be driven by human authorship, emphasizing emotional and political framing rather than mere data presentation.
Conclusion
The report serves as a tool for advocacy against the Trump administration's policies on scientific funding. Its narrative, while grounded in factual data, is crafted to elicit a strong emotional response and rally support for increased funding for health research.