Jeff Nesbit, who worked at both the National Institutes of Health and the National Science Foundation, wrote this article for The Contrarian. The question is one that I keep asking about many federal government programs that are being eliminated by Trump and Musk, like USAID.
Why? It makes no sense.
The fact that Trump chose Robert F.Kennedy Jr. as Secretary of Health and Human Services should have been an alarm bell; Kennedy is not only unqualified, he is stridently hostile to science.
The only beneficiary of this insane and reckless slashing of our most successful programs would be our international enemies, Russia and China. They want us to fail. Trump and Musk are making their dreams come true.
Nesbit wrote:
A siren call is cascading wildly through the corridors of every major academic center in America right now with a huge question firmly at its epicenter: Why are Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency, and President Donald Trump’s White House team hellbent on destroying the National Institutes of Health, the world’s gold standard of biomedical research?
There isn’t an easy answer to the question, unfortunately.
What is true and known is that Kennedy’s HHS team has halted communications activities about NIH grants; throttled necessary peer-reviewed grant-review meetings; ordered the federal agency staff to review dozens of keywords in thousands of existing grants and issue termination letters based on what it finds; threatened to fire hundreds of expert reviewers and core staff at the agency; placed a cap on indirect costs that underpin basic scientific and medical research; and put woefully unprepared, lower-level career staff in charge of key functions at the agency.
The actions have ground NIH to a halt and sent shockwaves through academia and the biomedical research institutions that have created nearly all our life-saving breakthroughs in the past quarter century. Higher education leaders have halted Ph. D. programs in response. Major research labs are being shuttered or told to stop most of their research.
An American biomedical research enterprise that has been the envy of the world’s science and medical community for decades has been surprised and shocked by the careless destruction of core staff functions and almost mindless efforts to purge NIH of hundreds or thousands of grants for reasons that seem ideological at best and irrational and dangerous at worst.
The question, again, is why? Why are Kennedy, Musk and Trump determined to eviscerate the most successful biomedical research system the world has ever known—a scientific enterprise that produces life-saving medicines and leads to breakthroughs (via basic scientific and medical research) that the private sector would never support?
There was a time, once, that NIH was supported by majorities of Republican and Democratic politicians. NIH’s budget, which supports the entire biomedical research field, has grown year after year with large, non-controversial, bipartisan majorities in Congress.
Until now. Trump and Musk have clearly determined that NIH and the National Science Foundation (NIH’s companion in the world of basic scientific research funding) need to be eviscerated and then reoriented away from life-saving scientific and medical research toward some destination not yet revealed. And while this effort has been racing forward, there has been almost no pushback from politicians—at least not yet.
One reason for this is that scientists are historically apolitical and, to be blunt, quite bad at the political game that dominates Washington, D.C. Scientists aren’t nearly as adept as others at advocating for themselves or their priorities to politicians who make funding decisions…
Trump, Musk and Kennedy don’t trust scientists or academia—and clearly don’t hear or recognize the immense value that the biomedical research enterprise brings to American progress.
NSF funding built and then supported the internet and led to nearly every modern computer and basic scientific advancement we recognize in the hard sciences. NIH medical and scientific research led directly to the creation of nearly all the life-saving drugs developed in the past quarter century that Americans rely on today.
The economic impact to states with large bioscience research centers would be enormous. Tennessee, for instance, would be devastated by the NIH cuts. Vanderbilt University Medical Center is one of the top research hospitals in America. It received nearly half a billion dollars in 2024 for medical research, the second most in the country. Its budget would be cut by more than 10 percent. Nearly 50,000 jobs and 4,000 businesses in Tennessee are dependent on the biosciences research enterprise in the state and would be severely impacted by the NIH cuts.
Other states, such as Missouri, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and North Carolina, would be similarly devastated by the cuts. Washington University in St. Louis received $717 million from NIH last year and would lose an estimated $108 million. The University of Michigan received $708 million and stands to see a cut of $119 million. Two Pennsylvania universities – the University of Pennsylvania and the University of Pittsburgh – received nearly $1.3 billion and could lose $244 million. All of those add up to massive job losses and devastating impacts to each state’s economies.
But Trump, Musk and Kennedy don’t trust the scientific and medical research enterprise. They don’t hear the entreaties by scientists who merely want to do great work that benefits the greater good. And they don’t listen to those calls of bewilderment from scientific and medical research leaders that are falling on deaf ears. This could be happening because scientists are particularly bad at politics.
But it also could be that Trump, Musk and Kennedy are willing to destroy the most successful biomedical research enterprise the world has ever known simply because it is a direct way to harm elite academic institutions that they believe harbor leaders and academics who are ideologically opposed to their aims and politics.
And that is a dangerous story that every American needs to hear and fully take to heart right now—before the Trump administration capriciously destroys a hundred years of scientific and medical progress in a matter of weeks or months.
Jeff Nesbit was the assistant secretary for public affairs at Health and Human Services (which includes NIH) in the Biden administration, and the director of legislative and public affairs at NSF during the Bush and Obama administrations.
After I put this article in the queue, I came across this article about John’s Hopkins University:
More than 2,000 positions related to global health are being cut from the Johns Hopkins University after the Baltimore institution saw $800 million in federal grants disappear, a spokesperson confirmed Thursday.
Hopkins’ medical school; the Bloomberg School of Public Health, including its Center for Communication Programs; and JHPIEGO, the university’s health initiative that focuses on global public health, will be affected by the cuts. USAID was the main funder for both JHPIEGO and CCP.
“This is a difficult day for our entire community. The termination of more than $800 million in USAID funding is now forcing us to wind down critical work here in Baltimore and internationally,” Hopkins’ spokesperson said in a statement.
The Trump administration, through advisor Elon Musk and his Department of Government Efficiency, is slashing federal spending across agencies in an effort to end wasteful spending. Such cuts have an outsized effect on Hopkins, which comes in first of all universities in federally funded research. By extension, those cuts affect Baltimore and Maryland, where Hopkins is the city and state’s largest largest private employer. Hopkins says it accounts for more than $15 billion in economic output in the state.
The funding cuts for research institutions are hurting universities in multiple states.
Who determines that basic research in science and medicine are unimportant?

LikeLike
The reason it makes no sense is that the authors of the piece assume good intentions. This is a false premise. From the Citizens United decision to the dis-enfranchise movement, the Republican Party has demonstrated that it is opposed to representation in government.
All of the actions of the Trump presidency are perfectly logical if you assume the need to establish a fascist state that can be passed to Vance, who will act for a time like a president. Musk will actually rule. Already social security is being destroyed, https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/politics/heres-a-dead-person-on-social-security-in-seattle-with-plenty-to-say/, and the only way that happens is if the Republicans think the ballot box is irrelevant. Attempts to disenfranchise women are underway, and efforts to make the military incompetent proceed apace.
if we take to the streets, they will say revolution and bring out thugs with guns. They want civil war. They want disorder. What we need, the disciplined non-violent protest of the Civil Rights movement, is decades in the making. I am not optimistic this morning.
LikeLike
Roy,
You are usually so mild and composed that your alarm sets off more alarms.
LikeLike
This thing with the deportations and Kalihl have got me worried. The matter puts me in a mind of the Palmer raids, the harsh 1920s and the rise of the modern KKK, the unleashing of business followed by the Great Depression. The big difference is that the first war had discredited Wilson’s internationalism. Now the discredited view of international involvement is simply an outgrowth of propaganda and media domination by very wealthy people.
The hope is that Trump overplays his hand and we get leadership that will take on the con artist and his hangers on.
LikeLike
Roy, I agree 100 percent.
LikeLike
The short answer to the “why” question can probably be found in remembering Trump deliberately stumbling across that stage mimicking that press person who was suffering from some sort of disability. Only now he has a cadre of like “minded” people nailing down every aspect of the new theoretical background that just was stated in your Network for Public Education writing:
“Hanging over all of these claims, of course, is the putrescence of race science, and the belief, shared by Musk and his fellow oligarchs, along with many Trumpian intellectuals, that hierarchy is both good and natural. In this view, a cognitive elite with the highest of the high IQs deserves to rule over the rest of us, all in our natural places. In this fixed economy of spoils, there is little point to an institution whose goal is “equalizing.”
Besides the utter arrogance embedded in such a view, the problem is “who is elite”? or even who has a “high IQ”? Are we talking about “stable geniuses” here? . . . but then there are shifts of meanings, after all, UP does mean DOWN? CBK
LikeLike
CBK,
In a true meritocracy, Kamala Harris would have been elected. Trump would be dumpster diving. He should release his academic records to prove his claims. He was born with a golden spoon in his mouth. He spent a lifetime hanging out with mobsters and the Russian mafia.
LikeLike
“or even who has a “high IQ”?”
How about WHAT is a “high IQ”.
There is no agreed upon definition of what makes up “intelligence” much less the ability to distinguish consistently what is high or low.
In other words it is a crock of a concept.
LikeLike
Duane, yes, its specious . . . and in today’s world, specialists abound where others have no clue; and artists emerge from every corner of human existence. And that doesn’t even matter where just being human is a baseline valued thing.
But they portray in themselves another version of the flat-souled person whose interior life is at best a rotting hairball but where they think of others, especially the poor, as “parasites.” A pot-to-kettle situation, for sure.
They’re just pulling another scam to excuse themselves (to Maga and in their own minds) from their nefarious motivations. CBK
LikeLiked by 1 person
The attack on NIH is not simply an attack on science. It is more complicated than ideological difference between conservative or liberal political leanings. The ideological dissonance is between democracy and an autocratic-kleptocracy like Russia. We cannot be so foolish to believe that Musk is working to eliminate waste and fraud. His goal is to dismantle the functioning of the federal government which, in turn, weakens us as a nation. Trump is also closing down “The Voice of America,” which has been in operation since 1942. The goal of this agency is to spread democratic ideology around the world and has nothing to do with science. Trump and Musk only see the America people as tools to use for their own ends. They do not care if we live or die so why should they spend public money on research that benefits the collective members of society when they can rig the government to funnel public funds into their own pockets. Trump and Musk are working for the benefit our enemies
LikeLike
“It is more complicated than ideological difference between conservative or liberal political leanings.”
Not it’s not between conservative and liberal. It is between regressive/reactionary leanings by those who seek to take America back to an imaginary time that never was nor ever will be and empathetic common sense societal thinking.
LikeLike
Why does Trump want to destroy America period??!!
LikeLike
My opinion: Trump is a Russian asset. He serves Putin. Everything he does weakens and divides us. He’s wrecking our military. His Cabinet choices will destroy their departments. RFK Jr will enable communicable diseases to wreak havoc on our people. Trump is Putin’s puppet.
LikeLike
yup
LikeLike
I cannot understand how so many in the GOP can be so complicit with this “great American heist.” If they put their own interests above those of their country, they are an enemy of the people.
LikeLike
That means that if we’re political people, if we care about the American Republic, if we care about this country, everything we do right now has to be guided toward defeating this takeover. These aren’t one and done things. It’s complicated. You may say you’re done with the Democratic Party. And fine … but then you are just going to have to reassemble the more or less identical coalition under a different label.
The STATE does not have a monopoly on power. It’s free because there are multiple nodes of power — cultural, economic, social — in the national space. Universities are one of those. The private sector economy is another.
We’ve got a huge job on our hands and there’s no guarantee we’ll succeed. But the first step of acting is knowing exactly where you are. People who are thinking in terms of Viktor Orbán are not surprised by each successive move. It’s actually pretty textbook. How it all shakes out comes down to the decisions countless private actors make. It also means supporting institutions that are meaningfully supporting free society.
https://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/observe-orient-decide-and-act-notes-on-preserving-the-american-republic
LikeLike
Agreed! This week I will join the protests at Tesla.
LikeLike
And donate money to those actually fighting Trump and Musk in court. Norm Eisen and Marc Elias are good places to start.
LikeLike
And Timothy Snyder’s fund for Ukraine
LikeLike
Kathy: Orban is indeed the model
LikeLike
The next time when it eventually comes. It will be Therese Defarge as Attorney General.
LikeLike
When I heard this, I must admit, I thought there must be something personal involved: Columbia, as is well known to those of us who have lived in Manhattan, is a big player in commercial and residential real estate, particularly on the Upper West Side, West Harlem, and Washington Heights. I figured the institution got the better of Trump somewhere along the line.
But then he did this to other institutions. So, what the hell?
LikeLike
Typical Fascist power play.
Harass universities.
They don’t obey.
LikeLiked by 1 person
This happened before in our individualist guided western culture where individual freedoms often trump (no pun intended but if it works that way, too,I’m okay with that) the health and wellbeing of the collective whole.
“Following the fall of the Western Roman Empire, scientific and technological advancements largely stagnated in Western Europe, as societal focus shifted towards survival and religious matters, while some knowledge was preserved and transmitted through the Eastern Roman Empire and Islamic world.”
If Diaper Don the Porn Star’s John succeeds in implementing all of Project 2025, the focus in the US will shift toward survival, and religion, which is part of Project 2025. To create a theocracy of some kind where we have no legal religious freedom.
Still, if the convicted rapist and felon doesn’t take down Canada, the UK and the EU with the United States, science and technology may survive and continue to advance there. Without NASA, France does have la location in French Guiana in South America where it launches rockets and satellites into orbit.
Then there’s China, which is a collective culture, so individualism won’t stop the advancement of science and knowledge there. The individual freedom to express your religious and political views are controlled and censored, but that will not affect science and technology.
So, if our species survives the malignant narcissist ruling over Russia and the United STates, that species may still have hope that there will not be a global dark ages, which has never happened yet during recorded histiory.
Science, knowledge and technology have always existed and advanced somewhere even after the Roman Empire fell.
In fact, for 1500 years up until the 16th century, when the european colonial empires arrived spreading Christianity and opium, China was the most technologically advanced country in the world and that included improving and advancing knowledge in healthcare. The Chinese took a different course than the west in healthcare. Instead of relying on surgery and profit driven drugs, China focused on learning what the best lifestyle choices were before surgery. China discovered centuries before the west that scurvy coud be avoided by sailers on long voyages, by growing sprouting vegetables on the ships in terracotta pots that the sailors ate. China also invented compartmentalised ships that made safer from sinking.
China also invented paper, silk, tea, the printing press, pizza, gunpowder, et al. before those appeared in the west usually centuries later.
LikeLike
LOL! the sailors didn’t eat the pots. They ate the sprouts.
LikeLike
Everyone who reads the NYT, as well as the rest of the mainstream media that is very much influenced by the narratives that the NYT amplifies knows the answer to the question posed here. Why does Trump do this?
According to the news articles I read in the NYT, Trump is motivated entirely by these things: Making America Great. Rooting out the waste and fraud in government and making government more efficient so taxpayers money is spent correctly. Protecting America from violent, criminal undocumented immigrants who were allowed free reign to kill Americans under Biden. Fixing the terrible economy left to him by Biden that was of grave concern to the regular Americans whose views were amplified in every news article in 2024.
Trump makes many bad mistakes that the NYT “bravely” reports on – but EXCLUSIVELY in news stories that leave unchallenged the myth that Trump’s MOTIVES are the very best. That leave unchallenged the myth that Doge’s hires are the very best to fulfill Trump’s admirable motives to make government for efficient. Trump and Musk are motivated only by wanting to do good for regular Americans.
That’s why Trump doesn’t hesitate to tell Americans that they will have to suffer economically. Because he knows the NYT will act as useful idiots and frame all their “negative” reporting to reinforce the only “truth” that matters when authoritarians seek to become totalitarians. That Trump’s motives are to do good things for the regular Americans – unlike the Dems who challenge Trump whose motives are ALWAYS about something other than helping regular Americans. Trump sometimes make mistakes or acts too aggressively in service of protecting good Americans. That’s why Trump does these things that some people may not like.
Since early 2024, the underlying narrative of every NYT news story about Democrats (the 4 years of Biden’s successful economic policy notwithstanding) is that Dems’ motivations is entirely different than Trump’s. Dems motivations are never presented as wanting to help regular Americans. Never. That is the one narrative that is always missing from stories about Dems and always implied in stories about Trump. Whether an article reports on good things Dems do, or bad things Trump does, the underlying narrative is always that Dems doing those good things are never in service to helping regular Americans (if they were, there would be no inflation and no undocumented immigrants committing crimes and no trans women harming women’s sports!) and Trump’s worst actions are always motivated by his goal of helping regular Americans.
It seems Orwellian that the NYT believes that any reporting that undermines the totally false (and patently absurd!) narrative that Trump is motivated exclusively to help regular Americans is “anti-Trump”.
It seems Orwellian that after all this time, our side STILL helps the NYT amplify the right wing narrative that the Democrats are NEVER motivated by wanting to do good things for America. The motivations of Dems are always suspect.
LikeLike
NYCPSP,
Like you, I am very alert to media bias. But I confess I have not seen the systematic bias you describe.
The Times has published devastating exposes about Trump and his heartless policies.
LikeLike
I agree with you that the NYT has published stories about the heartbreaking effects of some of Trump’s policies. But they present those stories as if the heartbreaking effects are the unfortunate byproducts of Trump’s (and Musk’s) ultimate (and popular) goal of making America great again, rooting out waste and fraud, keeping Americans safe from the violent actions of undocumented criminals, or various other popular goals (like “saving” Social Security and Medicare).
If there were a barrage of news articles that report on the heartless policies as byproducts of Trump and Musk intentionally sabotaging the agencies that do the good things that most Americans like but rich billionaires hate – that would be very harmful to Trump’s desire to become the tyrant he wants.
Trump is gutting the Social Security Agency. The NYT will report on this as if it is just another action in Trump’s goal of streamlining government and reforming the system. Any unfortunate effects will be reported, but framed as byproducts of Trump working for Americans to save Social Security from waste and fraud. Reporters twist themselves into knots to AVOID mentioning anything at all that implies Trump’s motivation is to sabotage and get rid of Social Security, not “save” it. That’s why there have been zero stories that actually point out that the Doge hires would only be hired by someone who wanted to sabotage the system, not make it work better and more efficiently.
It’s easy to miss because we read the articles and supply all the missing information that is inexplicably left out of the articles because it is supposedly not important. I noticed that in the discussion of the NYT article about Trump spurning the judge and deporting undocumented folks, YOU supplied the missing information that there might be 200 immigrants on the plane that had committed no crime. There was nothing like that in the article, which instead quoted many Republicans talking about the dangerous criminals being deported. The article didn’t even bother to give the judge’s rationale for preventing Trump from deporting all those criminals to keep America safe. It gave “just the facts” – Trump wanted to protect Americans by deporting these terrible criminals who are in the US illegally, and some judge was preventing it for no apparent reason!
If the “liberal media” can’t bother to frame this story in any way other than “Trump keeps his promises to make America more efficient and to deport dangerous criminals, but sometimes there are heartbreaking outcomes in Trump’s pursuit of those good goals and sometimes he has to go against a liberal judge to achieve his goals”, then the NYT is part of the problem, not part of the solution.
But if I missed a story that actually made it clear that Trump’s motives aren’t to make America great and root out fraud and waste and inefficiencies, then I’d love to read it. Both the Nicholas Kristof article about USAID and the article about Trump spurning the judge and deporting undocumented residents seemed to go out of their way to imply that while Trump’s actions may have caused some heartbreak, his motives are whatever Trump says they are, and it certainly is not the NYT’s job to ever report any facts that make it clear that Trump’s self-reported motives are absurdly false.
LikeLike
This article is good about Trump’s Orwellian assault on the English language. Trump is going to do that regardless. But it is very disheartening when the NYT is complicit in that dangerous deception, and reinforces the credibility of Trump’s misuse of language. That misuse of language gives the false narrative a legitimacy that the actual facts do not.
“If we object to DOGE’s indiscriminate layoffs and false claims of lucrative canceled contracts that are dubbed “efficiency” measures, then how do we avoid being charged with supporting inefficiency?”
quote above from an essay on the WBUR.org website, “Trump and Republicans’ assault on language” March 07, 2025 by Julie Wittes Schlack
More from the essay:
“Besides being disingenuous at best, vicious at worst, these actions have something else in common. They are all based on doublespeak, which Merriam-Webster defines as “language used to deceive usually through concealment or misrepresentation of truth.” Though “doublespeak” isn’t used in Orwell’s “1984,” it is based on his description in the book’s appendix of Newspeak, the official language developed and enforced by the authoritarian leaders of his fictional dystopian country Oceania. Newspeak was “designed not to extend but to diminish the range of thought.”
How does this kind of deliberate perversion of language do that? By undermining the notion of a shared, objective reality.
If we can agree that “dictatorship” and war are undesirable, but are presented with a false, upside-down account of who is the dictator who started the war, then how can we arrive at a reasoned policy toward Russia and Ukraine?
If we object to DOGE’s indiscriminate layoffs and false claims of lucrative canceled contracts that are dubbed “efficiency” measures, then how do we avoid being charged with supporting inefficiency?
If “transparency” means hiding Musk’s assets and conflicts of interest, then are we put in the ludicrous position of arguing for obfuscation?
If nearly two-thirds of Trump’s executive orders so far mirror proposals spelled out in that blueprint for autocracy — despite his campaign assurances that he knew nothing about Project 2025 — then what further degradation of a “promise” is even possible?
These are not just academic questions. As Orwell observed, “In our time, political speech and writing are largely the defense of the indefensible.” If we are to stop our government from engaging in indefensible actions, we must challenge their mendacious, paralyzing speech.
Contrary to the slogans of Oceania, war is not peace, freedom is not slavery, ignorance is not strength.”
LikeLike
https://www.wbur.org/cognoscenti/2025/03/07/trump-orwell-ukraine-elon-musk-doge-julie-wittes-schlack
LikeLike