Connect with us

Science

Trump Has Cut Science Funding to Its Lowest Level in Decades

Published

on

Trump Has Cut Science Funding to Its Lowest Level in Decades

Advertisement

National Science Foundation grant funding through May 21

10-year average

$2 billion

The National Science Foundation, which funds much of the fundamental scientific research at American universities, is awarding new grants at the slowest pace in at least 35 years.

Advertisement

The funding decreases touch virtually every area of science — extending far beyond the diversity programs and other “woke” targets that the Trump administration says it wants to cut.

Grants funded by the National Science Foundation through May 21 ↓ 51%

Advertisement

Advertisement

Math, physics and chemistry

$432m

Advertisement

The chart shows the intended funding amount for new grants awarded by the N.S.F. during the 2025 calendar year through May 21, compared with the average funding for the same period from 2015 to 2024. In 2025 dollars.

Advertisement

Source: N.S.F.

That means less support for early-stage research that underpins future technological advancements — and American competitiveness — in areas like computer science and engineering; physics and chemistry; climate science and weather forecasting; and materials and manufacturing innovations.

It also means less money for undergraduate and graduate students, postdoctoral researchers and early-career professors — potentially disrupting the nation’s future scientific work force.

Advertisement

Economists have warned that cutting federal funding for scientific research could, in the long run, damage the U.S. economy by an amount equivalent to a major recession.

“These cuts are the height of self-inflicted harm,” said Robert Atkinson, the president of the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation, a nonpartisan science and technology policy research institute. The foundation has argued that China probably already conducts more research and development than the United States.

Advertisement

“If they succeed in these cuts, the result will be slower economic growth, less innovation and new tech startups, and even more diminished competitiveness vis-à-vis China,” he added.

The lag in this year’s funding, more than $1 billion below the 10-year average, is for new research grants, but the Trump administration has gone further. It has also terminated more than 1,600 active grants for existing research projects, together worth roughly $1.5 billion (of which at least 40 percent has already been spent).

And it wants to eliminate nearly $5 billion of the agency’s $9 billion budget for next year, cutting spending on “climate; clean energy; woke social, behavioral and economic sciences,” and diversity, equity and inclusion programs.

Advertisement

Among the in-progress grants that have been terminated, those focused on education in science, technology, engineering and mathematics, or STEM, accounted for the vast majority of the canceled funding. Many of these grants focused on broadening participation in science and engineering among underrepresented student groups.

Advertisement

Canceled funding from in-progress grants

Advertisement

STEM education -$656 mil.
Math, physics, chem. -$61 mil.
Geosciences -$53 mil.
Computer science -$47 mil.
Social sciences -$46 mil.
Technology -$38 mil.
Engineering -$36 mil.
Biology -$28 mil.

Advertisement

The chart shows the total cut in intended award funding for terminated grants grouped by N.S.F. directorate after excluding money that has already been spent.

Source: USA Spending and Grant Watch

But in contrast with the canceled grants, the slowdown in issuing new grants is broader, representing an across-the-board hit to American science.

Advertisement

Decline in new grant funding in 2025

Advertisement

Advertisement

Math, physics, chem. -$289 mil.
STEM education -$223 mil.
Biology -$156 mil.
Engineering -$127 mil.
Geosciences -$101 mil.
Computer science -$85 mil.
Technology -$18 mil.
Social sciences -$16 mil.

The N.S.F. said in a statement that while it will focus on the Trump administration’s priorities — like artificial intelligence, quantum information science, biotechnology and nuclear energy — it remains “committed to awarding grants and funding all areas of science and engineering.”

Yet the data shows the agency’s funding of new grants at its lowest level since at least 1990, around when the N.S.F. expanded into its modern structure. The funding has slowed even further since April 30, when agency employees were told to stop awarding funds entirely, according to an email reviewed by The New York Times.

Advertisement

Cumulative grant funding by the National Science Foundation, 1990-2025

Advertisement

Shows the cumulative total intended award for all grants funded by the N.S.F. from Jan. 1 to May 21 of each year in 2025 dollars. Spikes reflect large multi-year grants.

Representative Zoe Lofgren of California, the top Democrat on the House science committee, said the Trump administration was denying funding that had already been approved by Congress.

Advertisement

“What they’re doing is not only illegal, but it’s also very damaging to the science enterprise and, ultimately, to the economy of the United States,” she said.

The N.S.F. has said it is canceling awards that are not in line with its priorities, including those focused on D.E.I., environmental justice, misinformation and disinformation. The cancellations have been cheered by Senator Ted Cruz, Republican of Texas, who in February published a list identifying more than a third of the grants that have been terminated.

Advertisement

“My Commerce Committee investigation exposed how the Biden administration corrupted the N.S.F. grantmaking process with a divisive fixation on identity politics,” Mr. Cruz said in a statement. “This kind of politicization erodes public trust in science. The N.S.F. must spend taxpayer dollars responsibly and prioritize objectivity and scientific rigor.”

House Democrats on the science committee have said the cancellations themselves are “based on hard-right political ideology and not scientific or research expertise,” and have noted flaws in Mr. Cruz’s report, like associating the term “biodiversity” with D.E.I.

N.S.F. officials interviewed for this article said many grants that have already gone through the agency’s rigorous review process and were recommended for funding have been in limbo for months. After the April 30 email freezing new awards, which was first reported by Nature, another email on May 13 allowed for some new funding but kept a freeze in place for higher education institutions.

Advertisement

A spokesman for the N.S.F. said it was still “making awards to higher education institutions.”

Either way, the N.S.F.’s directorate for STEM education has had one of the steepest shortfalls in new grants. Its award funding has declined by around 80 percent this year.

Advertisement

Funding through May 21 for …

STEM education ↓ 80%

Advertisement

Advertisement

Undergrad. education

$135m

Equity for excellence in STEM

Advertisement

$46m

Research on learning

$77m

The N.S.F. says that it directly supported over 350,000 researchers, teachers and students last year alone. It supports over 20,000 graduate students, more than any other federal agency except the National Institutes of Health, which funds medical research and has also awarded far fewer grants this year.

Advertisement

Within its education branch, the N.S.F. has moved to eliminate the division of equity for excellence in STEM, which promotes D.E.I. and supports students who are underrepresented in science and engineering. The closure has been put on hold by a court order.

The N.S.F.’s division of graduate education, which funds graduate student research, typically approves $21 million in grants by this point of the year, but has awarded none so far. It announced 1,000 graduate research fellowships this year, down from over 2,000 in prior years, as reported last month by Nature.

Advertisement

Ms. Lofgren said these education programs are required by law and were adopted with bipartisan support.

“You can’t have science without scientists,” she said.

Here’s how the shortfall in grant awards this year has affected other areas of science:

Advertisement

Math, physics and chemistry ↓ 67%

Advertisement

N.S.F. grant funding for core scientific disciplines like math, physics, chemistry and material sciences has dropped by two-thirds this year.

Advertisement

The N.S.F. funds “basic” research in these areas: fundamental or unexpected discoveries that may be decades away from practical applications. That includes research on ultrafast lasers in the 1990s that eventually resulted in bladeless LASIK eye surgery, or radar technology in the 1960s that revolutionized weather prediction three decades later.

Curiosity-driven research lays the foundation for private sector investments and leads to breakthroughs that can be commercialized, said Deborah Wince-Smith, the president of the Council on Competitiveness, a nonpartisan organization composed of chief executives, university presidents and heads of national laboratories.

Advertisement

The N.S.F. has also funded major astronomical observatories that have made groundbreaking discoveries such as capturing the first images of black holes or detecting gravitational waves.

In 2023, the N.S.F. funded half of all federally supported basic research in math and statistics in American colleges. So far this year, math and statistics grant funding is lagging behind previous years by 72 percent.

Funding for physics grants this year has fallen by 85 percent, and funding for materials research grants has dropped by 63 percent.

Advertisement

Engineering ↓ 57%

Advertisement

N.S.F. grant funding for core engineering disciplines has dropped by 57 percent this year. These divisions fund areas like robotics, manufacturing innovations and semiconductor research.

Advertisement

Funding for grants related to chemical, bioengineering, environmental and transport systems has fallen by 71 percent this year, while funding for grants related to civil and mechanical engineering and manufacturing innovation has fallen by 48 percent.

Biology ↓ 52%

Advertisement

Advertisement

Biological infrastructure

$99m

Advertisement

Most federal funding for biology research comes from the National Institutes of Health, but the N.S.F. also supports the field. Its grant funding for biology is at half of its previous 10-year average. There were fewer funds awarded for research in biotechnology and environmental biology, and less money for the tools, facilities and people that support biological research.

Computer science ↓ 31%

Advertisement

Advertisement

Information & intelligent systems

$68m

Advertisement

Advanced cyberinfrastructure

$39m

Computing foundations

$74m

Advertisement

Computer science divisions that have supported research in topics like artificial intelligence, data science, computer security and emerging computing technologies have awarded fewer funds this year.

But the office of advanced cyberinfrastructure has awarded twice the funding that is typical by this time of year, including a $26 million grant for generative A.I. tools and a $20 million grant to “advance American leadership in artificial intelligence.”

In 2023, the N.S.F. provided 72 percent of federal funds for foundational computer science research at colleges and universities.

Advertisement

The agency provided early funding that led to recent developments in artificial intelligence. For example, the researchers who received the 2024 Nobel Prize in Physics for their work in artificial neural networks — technologies that underlie tools like ChatGPT — received N.S.F. funding in the 1980s, long before their work had widespread applications.

The funds also support the careers of graduate students, a large share of whom eventually work in the technology industry, said Greg Hager, the former head of the N.S.F.’s Computer and Information Science and Engineering Directorate, who resigned from the agency this month.

Advertisement

“It’s going to impact progress today, but it’s going to have profound impacts for years to come,” he said of the reductions in funding for computer science.

Geosciences ↓ 33%

Advertisement

Advertisement

In 2023, the N.S.F. supported over half of all federally funded basic geosciences research in American universities.

This year, the agency has fired workers at the Office of Polar Programs, which coordinates research in the Arctic and the Antarctic. The polar office has awarded 88 percent less money in grants this year.

But the ocean sciences division has awarded more funding than typical this year, including a $39 million grant to establish an office that will manage a deep-sea drilling program and an $18 million grant to Columbia University to support a research vessel.

Advertisement

Social and behavioral sciences ↓ 20%

Advertisement

Advertisement

Social science & economics

$31m

Behavioral & cognitive sciences

$32m

Advertisement

There has been a 96 percent decrease in grant funding for multidisciplinary research, which spans biology, physics and engineering. Previously funded projects have included using cells as sensors to monitor pollutants and diseases in wastewater, creating biodegradable robots, and engineering fungi to recover valuable metals from e-waste.

The behavioral and cognitive sciences division has awarded 30 percent more grant funding this year compared with the past decade’s average — despite the Trump administration’s targeting of “woke social, behavioral and economic sciences.” That included funding research on tracking changes in romantic relationships, how hand gestures can enhance learning and a database that lists the average rents in a neighborhood.

Advertisement

Technology, innovation and partnerships ↓ 17%

Advertisement

Advertisement

Translational impacts

$86m

The CHIPS and Science Act, a bipartisan law enacted during the Biden administration in 2022, created the N.S.F.’s Directorate of Technology, Innovation and Partnerships. Last year it funded projects for agricultural technology in North Dakota, climate resilience in Wyoming and semiconductor assembly in Central Florida.

Advertisement

This branch’s grant funding has decreased by 17 percent, a moderate reduction compared with the decreases in other areas.

Here are all the changes so far:

Changes in N.S.F. grant funding

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement

Directorate 2015-2024 avg. funding 2025 funding Change
Education $280 mil. $56 mil. -80%
Graduate education $21 mil. $0 -100%
Equity for excellence in STEM $46 mil. $1 mil. -97%
Research on learning in formal and informal settings $77 mil. $16 mil. -79%
Undergraduate education $135 mil. $39 mil. -71%
Math, physics and chemistry $432 mil. $143 mil. -67%
Strategic initiatives $6k $0 -100%
Physics $72 mil. $11 mil. -85%
Mathematical sciences $113 mil. $32 mil. -72%
Materials research $118 mil. $43 mil. -63%
Chemistry $103 mil. $44 mil. -57%
Astronomical sciences $26 mil. $12 mil. -53%
Engineering $221 mil. $94 mil. -57%
Emerging frontiers in research and innovation $2 mil. $42k -98%
Chemical, bioengineering, environmental and transport systems $75 mil. $22 mil. -71%
Engineering education and centers $27 mil. $12 mil. -56%
Civil, mechanical, and manufacturing innovation $80 mil. $42 mil. -48%
Electrical, communications and cyber systems $36 mil. $19 mil. -48%
Biology $303 mil. $147 mil. -52%
Biological infrastructure $99 mil. $32 mil. -68%
Integrative organismal systems $88 mil. $34 mil. -61%
Environmental biology $75 mil. $39 mil. -49%
Molecular and cellular biosciences $40 mil. $37 mil. -9%
Emerging frontiers $801k $5 mil. +521%
Geosciences $305 mil. $204 mil. -33%
Office of polar programs $51 mil. $6 mil. -88%
Earth sciences $78 mil. $16 mil. -80%
Research, innovation, synergies and education (RISE) $11 mil. $6 mil. -47%
Atmospheric and geospace sciences $63 mil. $40 mil. -36%
Ocean sciences $103 mil. $136 mil. +33%
Computer science $277 mil. $192 mil. -31%
Information & intelligent systems $68 mil. $27 mil. -60%
Computer and network systems $96 mil. $42 mil. -57%
Computing and communication foundations $74 mil. $43 mil. -41%
Office of advanced cyberinfrastructure $39 mil. $80 mil. +102%
Social sciences $78 mil. $62 mil. -20%
National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics $2 mil. $0 -100%
Multidisciplinary activities $11 mil. $401k -96%
Social and economic sciences $31 mil. $20 mil. -37%
Behavioral and cognitive sciences $32 mil. $42 mil. +30%
Technology $110 mil. $92 mil. -17%
Technology frontiers $9k $0 -100%
Translational impacts $86 mil. $44 mil. -48%
Innovation and technology ecosystems $24 mil. $47 mil. +95%
Other $65 mil. $47 mil. -29%
Total $2.1 bil. $1 bil. -50%

Shows the cumulative total intended award for new grants funded by the N.S.F. from Jan. 1 to May 21 of each year.

Advertisement

‘Total confusion’

The National Science Foundation has usually awarded half of its funds for the fiscal year by early July. In theory, this year’s funding levels could still catch up to former levels if the agency accelerates its pace of making awards over the summer.

Advertisement

But officials described an agency that has been thrown into chaos as it tries to navigate a new political landscape under President Trump. The agency is in the midst of a major restructuring to eliminate its 37 divisions. It has also conducted layoffs and placed pressure on its workers to resign or retire. (The restructuring and termination of employees has been paused by a court order until Friday.)

Many N.S.F. divisions do not know how much they can spend this fiscal year, which ends Sept. 30, and this uncertainty may also be contributing to this year’s funding lag.

“There’s total confusion,” said one employee who has worked at the N.S.F. for more than a decade and is involved in determining which grants are recommended for funding. The employee, who did not want to be named out of fear of retaliation for speaking to the news media, said that the N.S.F.’s rigorous review process had been disassembled, and that political mandates had taken precedence over scientific merits when assessing grant proposals.

Advertisement

“There’s confusion on how much money we can spend,” the employee said. “And then there’s confusion because the processes are basically paralyzed.”

Advertisement

About the data

Advertisement

Using the N.S.F.’s awards database, we tabulated the intended award amounts for all projects funded between Jan. 1 and May 21 of each year. The award date is determined by the initial amendment date, which typically precedes the start date of the project. Intended awards reflect the amount that the N.S.F. intends to fund over the entire life of a project, which may extend multiple years beyond the year the project was awarded. All award amounts are inflation-adjusted to March 2025 dollars by using the Personal Consumption Expenditures price index.

Science

CDC warns of dramatic rise in dangerous drug-resistant bacteria. How you can protect yourself

Published

on

CDC warns of dramatic rise in dangerous drug-resistant bacteria. How you can protect yourself

Infection rates are soaring in the United States due to a menacing bacteria that are resistant “to some of the strongest antibiotics available,” prompting infectious-disease experts to warn about the difficulty of responding to the surge.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention warned in a report this week that between 2019 and 2023, bacterial infections caused by a “super bug” bacteria dubbed NDM-producing carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales (NDM-CRE) surged by more than 460% in the U.S.

The NDM-CRE is a type of bacteria with a special gene that can break down powerful antibiotics rendering most drug treatments ineffective, said Shruti Gohil, associate professor of infectious diseases at UC Irvine School of Medicine.

“This makes these ‘superbug’ bacteria very hard to treat because they’re resistant to some of the strongest antibiotics we have,” Gohil said.

The CDC’s findings, originally published in a 2022 report, noted that there were approximately 12,700 infections and 1,100 deaths in the U.S. in 2020 due to this drug-resistant bacteria.

Advertisement

The public health agency did not determine the exact reason for the surge; however, there is an association involving the use of antibiotics to treat COVID-19 patients in the beginning of the pandemic, said Neha Nanda, medical director of antimicrobial stewardship with USC’s Keck Medicine.

Public health officials warn that NDM-CRE has not historically been common in the U.S., so healthcare providers might not suspect it when treating patients with bacteria-related infections.

The rise of the bacteria also “threatens to increase NDM-CRE-related infections and deaths,” according to the CDC.

This is the second report the CDC released that highlighted a rise in bacteria-related cases, the most recent was published in June and focused on cases in New York City between 2019 and 2024.

Available treatment for NDM-CRE?

Experts say people with NDM-CRE bacteria won’t have any symptoms unless they develop an infection. Once they develop an infection, the symptoms will vary. NDM-CRE can cause such ailments as pneumonia, bloodstream infections, urinary tract infections and wound infections.

Advertisement

Some symptoms can include fever, chills with cough, shortness of breath if the bacteria infect the lung, and pain or blood when urinating if the bladder/kidneys are infected.

Since the bacteria are resistant to most antibiotics, treatment options are severely limited, leading to slower recovery and higher risk of serious complications or death, Gohil said.

Another reason health officials are concerned is because the bacteria can spread to others and survive on contaminated surfaces.

Doctors can test for NDM-CRE, but most people do not need to be tested unless they are at higher risk for having it, according to experts.

Those at risk are people who have been “in a hospital (especially in another country), had repeated antibiotics, hospital stays, or invasive medical procedures, or if you’re sick and been in contact with someone known to have NDM-CRE,” Gohil said.

Advertisement

Testing for the bacteria is also difficult because many hospitals and clinics do not have the tools to rapidly detect it in patients even when the patient is not sick.

How to protect yourself against NDM-CRE

NDM-CRE is caused by overuse of powerful antibiotics.

“I think this may be an opportunity for us to change the narrative where all patients typically want antibiotics,” Nanda said.

Nanda advises patients who are being prescribed with antibiotics to ask their healthcare provider:

  • Why they’re getting prescribed the antibiotics? Why is it necessary?
  • Ask about your options. Make sure you’ve exhausted all other treatments options before going straight to antibiotics.

“If you need it, you need it, but then be judicious about it,” she said.

Because NDM-CRE infections happen to people who are very sick, patients in hospitals or in long-term care, experts recommend that patients, healthcare staff and visitors in these settings wash their hands and avoid contact with dirty surfaces.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Science

Trump says research links Tylenol and autism; scientists say their paper is being misinterpreted

Published

on

Trump says research links Tylenol and autism; scientists say their paper is being misinterpreted

During this week’s White House press conference in which President Trump named the over-the-counter drug Tylenol as a possible cause of rising autism rates, he did not mince words, urging pregnant women to “fight like hell” not to take it.

But outside those remarks in the Roosevelt Room — during which Trump himself acknowledged “I’m not so careful with what I say” — the discussion on the common fever and pain reliever’s role during pregnancy is a lot more nuanced.

What the research on Tylenol use during pregnancy actually says

Physicians, researchers on the very studies cited in support of Trump’s position and even other members of the president’s administration are largely united on a few key facts: untreated fevers in pregnancy pose real risks to the fetus, acetaminophen (Tylenol’s active ingredient) remains the safest medication to treat them and any pregnant person seeking advice on the issue should consult their doctor.

“All that we should be asking of the medical profession [is] to actually weigh the risks and benefits for the women, with the women, and be cautious about chronic use of pain medications,” said Dr. Beate Ritz, a UCLA professor of epidemiology who co-authored a paper published last month that the White House cited as evidence for the link between Tylenol and autism.

Ritz said it has been misinterpreted.

Advertisement

The conclusion of the paper, which reviewed existing studies on the topic, was that the association between acetaminophen use in pregnancy and later diagnoses of neurodevelopmental disorders in kids was strong enough to merit doctors’ consideration when determining how to treat fever or pain in pregnancy. The group did not determine a causal relationship between the drug and autism, or suggest barring the drug altogether, she said.

“Looking at all of these studies, yes, there is a risk,” Ritz said. “It’s not very big, but it’s there, but the risk increases are more seen in regular users of Tylenol. This is not a woman who has a fever and takes three Tylenols.”

“There is always a weighing of the risks and the benefits, and fever in women is no good either. … Not having to take any pain medications when you are in severe pain or in chronic pain is also very cruel,” she said. “We all should have an interest in helping out here, making the right decisions without blaming the victim and putting it all on the individual woman.”

Her co-author, University of Massachusetts epidemiologist Ann Bauer, has made similar statements.

“What we recommend is judicious use — the lowest effective dose [for] the shortest duration of time under medical guidance and supervision, tailored to the individual,” Bauer told the news outlet Politico.

Advertisement

The administration’s confusing recommendations

Ultimately, that’s what the administration is recommending as well.

The letter that U.S. Food and Drug Administrator Dr. Marty Makary sent to physicians this week made clear that “a causal relationship” between autism and acetaminophen “has not been established and there are contrary studies in the scientific literature.”

It went on to recommend that clinicians consider limiting their use of acetaminophen for routine low-grade fevers during pregnancy, while noting that medical advice “should also be balanced with the fact that acetaminophen is the safest over-the-counter alternative in pregnancy among all analgesics and antipyretics.” (An analgesic is a pain reliever; an antipyretic reduces fever.)

Untreated fevers during pregnancy are associated with higher rates of birth defects, particularly those of the heart, brain and spinal cord; premature birth; low birth weight; neurodevelopmental disorders including autism; and fetal death, said Dr. E. Nicole Teal, an assistant professor of maternal-fetal medicine at UC San Diego.

“The FDA’s letter, while significantly more nuanced than the president’s comments on the issue, still gives too much weight to findings from poorly designed studies,” she said.

Advertisement

She said she will continue to prescribe acetaminophen to pregnant patients who need to treat fevers or severe pain, as it has the fewest known risks in pregnancy.

Are there other pain-relief and fever-reducing drugs that can be used during pregnancy?

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs like ibuprofen (often sold as Advil) or naproxen (often sold as Aleve) are linked to problems with blood vessel and kidney development, as well as oligohydramnios, a condition in which there isn’t enough amniotic fluid to support a healthy pregnancy. Aspirin raises the risk of bleeding complications, and narcotics — which can relieve pain but not fever — pose addiction risks for the mother and infant alike, Teal said.

She referred to a statement from the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists noting that two decades of research on the question had failed to find a causal relationship between acetaminophen and autism.

“Acetaminophen is one of the few options available to pregnant patients to treat pain and fever, which can be harmful to pregnant people when left untreated,” American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists president Dr. Steven J. Fleischman said in the statement.

The group also noted that reviews in 2015 and 2017 from the FDA and the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine respectively found no risks associated with appropriate usage of the drug in pregnancy.

Advertisement

How to navigate government communications around Tylenol use

Nonetheless, the mixed messaging from the Trump administration about Tylenol seems likely to continue.

The Department of Health and Human Services this week reposted a 2017 tweet from the Tylenol brand’s account that said, “We actually don’t recommend using any of our products while pregnant.”

A spokesperson for Kenvue, the company that owns Tylenol, said the post was taken out of context and incomplete.

“Consistent with regulations, our label states clearly ‘if pregnant or breast-feeding, ask a health professional before use,’ ” Melissa Witt said in an email. “We do not make recommendations on taking any medications in pregnancy because that is the job of a healthcare provider.”

Vice President JD Vance offered similar guidance this week.

Advertisement

“My guidance to pregnant women would be very simple, which is follow your doctor. Right?” Vance said in an interview with the outlet NewsNation after Trump’s press conference. “Talk to your doctor about these things.”

Continue Reading

Science

How California families are already bracing for looming Medicaid cuts

Published

on

How California families are already bracing for looming Medicaid cuts

Ever since Elijah Maldonado was born at just 29 weeks, he has needed specialty treatments that his family could afford only with publicly funded healthcare.

Diagnosed with cerebral palsy as an infant, he spent his first three months at a public hospital in Orange County, where the familiy lives.

Now 7, Elijah receives physical and speech therapy among a host of other services paid for through Medicaid. He relies on a wheelchair funded by the government. An assistant paid for with taxpayer dollars makes sure he’s safe on the bus ride to and from school.

Each month, he receives a $957 disability check that helps to cover his and his family’s living expenses.

Josephine Rios wipes her grandson Elijah’s face.

Advertisement

(Juliana Yamada / Los Angeles Times)

Still learning to speak on his own, he uses a Proloquo speech app on an iPad provided by his school to tell his family when he’s hungry, needs to use the restroom or wants to play with his favorite toys.

“It’s his voice — his lifeline,” his aunt and primary caretaker Cassandra Gonzalez says of the app. Her compensation for his in-home care comes from taxpayer dollars too.

Now that lifeline — and much of the government assistance Elijah receives — is at risk of going away.

Advertisement

With hundreds of billions of dollars worth of cuts to Medicaid and food aid kicking in this fall thanks to the passage of the Republican-backed “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” — on top of earlier cuts imposed by Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency — a host of federally funded healthcare and nutrition programs that serve low-income Americans will be scaled back, revamped with expanded work requirements and other restrictions or canceled altogether if individual states can’t find alternate funding sources.

The budget reduces federal spending on Medicaid alone by about $1 trillion over the next 10 years nationwide, with initial reductions taking effect in the coming weeks.

Gov. Gavin Newsom responded by accusing the Trump administration of “ripping care from cancer patients, meals from children and money from working families — just to give tax breaks to the ultra-rich.”

L.A. public health officials called the cuts devastating for a county where nearly 40% of the population is enrolled in Medi-Cal, the state’s Medicaid program. L.A. County’s Department of Health Services, which oversees four public hospitals and about two dozen clinics, projects a budget reduction amounting to $750 million a year, and federal funding for the Department of Public Health, which inspects food, provides substance-use treatment and tracks disease outbreaks, will drop by an estimated $200 million a year. Spending cuts have prompted hiring freezes and projections of ballooning budget deficits, county health officials said.

Spending reductions, combined with recent changes to the Affordable Care Act and Medicare, could leave an additional 1.7 million people in California uninsured by 2034, according to an analysis by the nonprofit healthcare research organization KFF.

Advertisement

Cuts to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), colloquially known as “food stamps,” will exceed $280 billion over the next decade, according to projections from the Congressional Budget Office.

It’s not just that the cuts to these programs are massive by historical standards.

The new rules and restrictions are confusing and states have been given little guidance from the federal agencies that oversee health and nutrition programs on how, or even when, to implement them, experts at the Center on Budget Policy and Priorities wrote in a recent report.

What’s clear, the CBPP said, is that millions of children, older adults, people with disabilities and veterans stand to lose not just Medicaid coverage but federal aid to access the type of healthy foods that could prevent illness and chronic conditions.

More than 5 million California households receive food aid through the state’s CalFresh program and 97% percent of them will see their benefits either slashed or eliminated because of federal spending cuts, changes to eligibility requirements or financial constraints at the state level, according to an analysis by the nonpartisan California Budget Policy Center.

Advertisement
Elijah plays with toy cars outside his aunt's home in Tustin.

Elijah plays with toy cars outside his aunt’s home in Tustin.

(Juliana Yamada / Los Angeles Times)

In Orange County, where Elijah’s family lives, public health officials were already reeling from federal spending cuts in the months before the budget bill passed, said Dr. Veronica Kelley, director of the OC Health Care Agency. For example, there was the $13.2-million cut to funding for family planning services in the county, and the $4-million reduction in funding to Women, Infants and Children nutrition (WIC).

The agency has worked to prevent mass layoffs by moving public-health workers in canceled programs to other departments or leaving some positions unfilled in order to save jobs elsewhere, and it has sought out nonprofit social service organizations and philanthropies to either take over programs or help fund them, Kelley said.

Now, Kelley is preparing for possible cuts to programs to combat obesity, maintain community gardens, help seniors make better healthcare decisions and reduce the use of tobacco. The agency also has to figure out how to make up for a $4.8-million reduction in federal funds for the county’s SNAP program that takes effect on Wednesday — another casualty of the federal spending bill.

Advertisement

The measures that the agency has leaned on to get through the year are not sustainable, Kelley said. “We can only do that for so long,” she said. “It’s chaotic. In terms of healthcare, it’s devastating… It feels like we’re taking so many steps backward.”

The looming cuts and changes have also set off alarm bells at Kaiser Permanente, California’s largest private healthcare provider with 9.5 million members statewide, 1.1 million of whom are enrolled in Medi-Cal.

“Without the ability to pay, newly uninsured people will find themselves having to delay care, leading to more serious and complex health conditions, increasing the use of emergency services and more intensive medical services,” Kaiser Permanente Southern California Regional spokeswoman Candice Lee said in a statement to The Times.

“This will affect all of us as the cost of this uncompensated care leads hospitals and care providers to charge paying customers more to cover their costs. Some hospitals and providers, especially those in rural and underserved areas, will be unable to make up for these unreimbursed costs, and will be financially threatened by these changes.”

Standing in front of her sister Cassandra’s town home in Tustin, a quiet suburban city of 80,000 about 10 miles south of Disneyland, Elijah’s mother, Samantha Rios; grandmother Josephine Rios; and Aunt Cassandra are filled with worry.

Advertisement
Elijah points to a command on his Proloquo speech app, which he uses to communicate his needs.

Elijah points to a command on his Proloquo speech app, which he uses to communicate his needs.

(Juliana Yamada / Los Angeles Times)

Josephine, a nursing assistant who works at a Kaiser hospital in Orange County, said she hears the panic in patients’ voices when they describe rushing to schedule needed medical procedures in anticipation of losing their Medicaid benefits.

Earlier this year, Josephine joined delegations of unionized California healthcare workers who traveled to Washington with the aim of pressing lawmakers to oppose spending cuts.

Rep. Young Kim, the Republican who represents the Rios family’s district in Congress, was receptive to the delegation’s pleas to vote no on the budget bill, Josephine recalls. The congresswoman ultimately voted for the bill, saying on her official webpage the legislation was good for Californians because it would relieve the tax burden on families, ensure that government dollars are used effectively and “strengthen Medicaid and SNAP for our most vulnerable citizens who truly need it.”

Advertisement
Elijah's Aunt Cassandra and grandmother Josephine look over his shoulder as he watches a TV show.

Elijah’s Aunt Cassandra and grandmother Josephine look over his shoulder as he watches a TV show.

(Juliana Yamada / Los Angeles Times)

Now, Josephine looked on as Elijah, seated in his wheelchair, played on his iPad and watched a Disney program on his phone. He can press a tab on the touchscreen to make the tablet say “My name’s Elijah” if he’s feeling unsafe away from home, another to tell his family he needs space when upset.

Watching Elijah enjoy himself, the women said they feel awkward broadcasting their woes to strangers when all they desire is what’s best for him. They don’t need the public’s pity.

The family wants lawmakers and the public to understand how seemingly abstract healthcare decisions involving billions of dollars, and made 2,000-plus miles away in Washington, have brought new financial turmoil to a family that’s already on the edge financially.

Advertisement

Samantha, a single mom, works full time to provide a home for Elijah and his two sisters, ages 10 and 8. A subscription to the Proloquo speech app alone would cost $300 a year out-of-pocket — more than she can afford on her shoestring budget.

Due to changes in household income requirements, Samantha had already lost Medicaid coverage for herself and her two girls, she said, as well as her SNAP food assistance, leaving her at a loss for how to fill the gap. She now pays about $760 a month to cover her daughters and herself through her employer-based health plan.

The cut to food aid has forced her to compensate by getting free vegetables, milk, eggs and chicken from the food pantry at a local school, a reality that she said she was at first too ashamed to disclose even to relatives.

Then came the bad news Samantha recently received about Elijah’s monthly Social Security Insurance for his disability. She was stunned to hear that because of stricter income cut-offs for that type of aid, Elijah would no longer receive those checks as of Oct. 1.

“Before, he was getting $957 a month — obviously that’s grocery money for me,” Samantha said. The money also went to buy baby wipes, as well as knee pads to help him move more comfortably on the floor when not using his wheelchair.

Advertisement

“I don’t get food stamps. I don’t get Medi-Cal for my girls. I don’t get any of that,” Samantha said. “As of Oct. 1, now I’ve got to figure out how am I going to pay my rent? How am I going to buy groceries?”

Luckily, the sisters said, the physical, speech and behavioral-health therapies that Elijah receives are safe — for now.

And the women know they can lean on each other in tough times. The sisters and Josephine all live within minutes of each other in Tustin, close enough for Samantha’s children to eat at someone’s home when their own cupboards are bare.

Every few months, Samantha said, Elijah experiences severe seizures that can last up to 90 minutes and require hospitalization.

Cassandra and Josephine like that they can run over to help if Elijah has a medical emergency. Another sister who lives farther away is on hand when needed too.

Advertisement

“What’s going to happen to other families who don’t have that support system?” Samantha said.

Given the potential for further cuts to programs that pay for home-based healthcare and assistants for people with disabilities, Cassandra wonders what will happen to her own family if she can no longer work as Elijah’s caregiver.

Where would the family get the money to pay a new caregiver who is qualified enough to work with a special-needs child who can speak a few words thanks to speech therapy but who cannot eat, walk or use the restroom without supervision? What if funding is eliminated for the assistant who travels with Elijah to school?

“People think that cutting Medi-Cal, cutting food stamps or whatever isn’t going to affect that many people,” Cassandra said. “It’s affecting my nephew and nieces. It’s affecting my sister. But it’s not just affecting her household. It’s affecting my household.”

“We’re not saying we’re going to Disneyland or going out to eat every day,” Cassandra said. “This is just living. We can’t even live at this point, with things being cut.”

Advertisement

The women offered up principles they feel are in short supply lately in the discourse over the government’s role in public health — among them “morals” and “empathy.” Samantha adds one more word to the list.

“Humanity,” she says. “We lack it.”

Continue Reading

Trending