According to science.org, the second Trump administration has brought devastating cuts to American science throughout 2025, with research grants abruptly terminated and restrictions placed on international scientific talent. Government attacks have raised concerns about a lost generation of scientific talent, compounded by cuts to programs that help traditionally excluded groups participate in science. The motivation appears politically useful, with higher education becoming increasingly polarized—only 42% of Americans support higher education, nearly identical to the percentage who actually hold college degrees. This educational divide has become the single best predictor of voting patterns, making defunding higher education politically popular despite the collateral damage to scientific research.
The Real Target Isn’t Science
Here’s the thing that really stands out: the science cuts aren’t really about science. They’re using research funding as a weapon to attack the entire higher education system. Public confidence in scientists actually remains higher than in journalists, business leaders, or politicians. The problem is that undergraduate education itself has become politically toxic. When only 42% of Americans support higher education—basically just the people who have degrees—you’ve got a massive perception problem. And politicians are exploiting that divide perfectly.
The Broken Compact With America
So what went wrong? The article points to Harvard philosopher Danielle Allen’s argument that higher education needs a new compact with the public. For decades, we’ve pushed the narrative that everyone should go to college. But that ideal has fractured along political lines. Think about it—when college education becomes the single biggest predictor of how someone votes, you’ve got a system that’s alienating half the country. The people who haven’t directly benefited from Pell Grants or college degrees? They’re not exactly rushing to defend universities when politicians come after them.
The Overlooked Teaching Crisis
Now here’s where it gets really concerning. The solution isn’t just about better PR for science—it’s about fixing undergraduate education. Faculty are already doing great work with teaching, but they’re not getting the time, resources, or recognition they need. Administrators have been worrying about this for decades with endless meetings that go nowhere. Meanwhile, the next generation of scientists needs inspiring teachers more than ever. Without those educators doing the hard work of mentoring students, future breakthroughs will be much harder to come by. Basically, we’re risking our scientific future because we can’t get the teaching part right.
Where Do We Go From Here?
Looking at 2026 and beyond, the path forward requires some honest conversations. Do we need to acknowledge that not everyone needs a college degree to thrive? Should we celebrate small business owners and skilled tradespeople as much as we celebrate Ivy League graduates? The current model clearly isn’t working when support has collapsed to 42%. The good news is that confidence in scientists specifically remains relatively strong according to Gallup polling. But if universities want to protect research funding, they might need to completely rethink how they serve—and are perceived by—the American public. The alternative? More years like 2025, where science becomes collateral damage in political wars.
