Basic research has been the foundation of all the technological advancements we enjoy today. Everything from the Internet to mRNA vaccines are the result of what scientists did in a lab—long before it was evident that something useful would result from their hard work. But despite its importance, basic research has been threatened with numerous cuts in federal funding.
Proposed budget cuts to basic research in 2026 were steep and severe. For example, The National Science Foundation (NSF) was set to lose 56% of its budget—which resulted in the agency cancelling over 1,500 grants. Congress ultimately rejected this proposal, but the agency did suffer a 3.4% reduction in funding.
Similarly, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) was expected to lose 24.3% of its funding. Congress also rejected this deep cut, but the agency still received 1.6% of less funding.
“Budget cuts like these are myopic,” warns Chris Shaw, Chief Marketing Officer at NTT Research. “Although there’s a debate to be had about whether budget cuts to basic research are fiscal or political, the result is still the same—they could surrender our future by eliminating the knowledge needed to move humanity forward.”
What Basic Research Is (and Isn’t)
Dismissing the importance of basic research may be the result of a misunderstanding about what it actually is, says Shaw. “Think of it as walking into a pitch-black room you’ve never been in with no map to guide you,” he said. “During this process, you make your way through the darkness, find a way to turn on a light switch, and discover whatever there is to see. You explore the unknown to gain knowledge, write about what you learned, and then subject your findings to the scrutiny of other scientists during a peer review process. Those papers are the inventions that may one day become innovations that enrich us all.”
This differs from applied research and corporate research and development, where scientists have different goals, timelines, and incentives. However, Shaw notes that without the foundation of basic research, none of this would be possible.
“Applied research builds on the knowledge that has been gained through basic research, and cannot be done without it,” Shaw said.
The Post–WWII Playbook That Worked
The basic research playbook has been successful because it’s become the basis for tangible discoveries that serve a specific, useful purpose. Basic research led to the establishment of quantum physics, for example, which ultimately became the foundation for creating the atomic bomb.
In the post-WWII world, this model has been the way new discoveries have been made and new products have been produced. It starts with federal funding for research at universities, then moves on to peer reviews that validate the quality of that research. After research has been given the seal of approval from scientists and papers have been published, the private sector gets involved and uses the work of researchers as the basis for new products we all benefit from.
“Whether it’s the Internet, biotech products, or semiconductors, our daily lives are filled with examples of what happens when scientists ask questions and have the resources needed to find the answers,” Shaw said.
The New Risk: Politics Over Curiosity
Budget cuts can have catastrophic effects on science—shuttered labs, lost jobs, and abandoned studies. People may only look at the actual dollar amount being cut and think it’s not a big deal. After all, labs are still receiving millions of dollars. However, budget cuts have a real impact on workers when an employer is forced to reduce salaries by a percentage.
“Losing 50% of your wages would clearly have negative consequences on your life,” said Shaw. “Labs losing half their funding is no different.”
But semantics do make a difference. Politicians on both sides of the aisle may justify reducing, or even eliminating, certain research funding by claiming they favor studies that meet the “gold standard.”
But what does that really mean? According to Shaw, it all amounts to bias.
“Politicians tend to favor funding for research that will produce the type of outcomes they approve of, while discouraging research that may have results they don’t support,” he said. “This politicizes science and devalues the work needed for discoveries that become the basis of advancement.”
Global Reality: Others Won’t Wait
Science doesn’t stand still. Just because the United States is cutting science for research doesn’t mean that other countries will. In fact, other countries are more likely to continue accelerating their basic research. Since talent follows funding, other countries will keep increasing their STEM pipelines.
“This puts the future of American science at risk. No funding means no scientists,” Shaw said. “Once these talented minds are gone, they’re likely gone for good—and the potential breakthroughs they could have made go with them.”
Safety, Ethics, and the “What If” Objection
The road from scientific theory to practical application can be a long one. It can often take decades from when a scientist asks “What if” to when that inquiry actually pays off. In the meantime, researchers are governed by safety and ethical guidelines, so learning shouldn’t be inhibited because politicians are preemptively concerned about how results may be used later.
“Saying no to research before scientists know where it will lead isn’t the answer,” Shaw said. “The application of research can be regulated and legislated, but stifling the questions robs the world of important answers.”
What Leaders Can Do
The basic research of today becomes the innovations of tomorrow, so it’s incumbent on leaders to make sure that university labs get the funding they need. The research process, including peer review, must be protected. The public must be informed about what basic research is and why it’s so important.
This opens up future opportunities downstream, including avenues for the private sector to use applied research to develop new products. Thanks to basic research, scientists become more seasoned, startups get created, and the next great discovery becomes a reality.
“None of that is possible when research is defunded,” said Shaw. “While leaders may believe the money they save today is worth it, budget cuts are robbing the innovations of tomorrow—and it’s a price humanity cannot afford to pay.”
