Trump’s 2027 Budget Proposes Multi-Billion-Dollar Cuts For Climate And Environmental Programs

A budget document from the US Office of Management and Budget proposes significant cuts to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the National Institutes of Health, the Department of Energy's Office of Science, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology. This isn't to mention the 23 percent budget cut to NASA, which IFLScience previously covered here.

According to an analysis by Nature News, NASA would see its budget fall from $24.4 billion to $18.8 billion, while the National Institutes of Health would drop from $47.2 billion to $41.3 billion. NOAA faces a cut from $6.2 billion to $4.5 billion, and the Department of Energy's Office of Science from $8.4 billion to $7.1 billion.

The deepest cuts are directed at the National Science Foundation (NSF) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) – both currently funded at $8.8 billion – which would see reductions of more than 50 percent, leaving them with $4 billion and $4.2 billion, respectively.

The NSF is the federal agency that funds basic scientific research across virtually every field of science and engineering except medicine, while the EPA is responsible for protecting public health by regulating pollution, toxic chemicals, and industrial emissions. The latter also reports greenhouse gas emissions and tracks the science on the causes of climate change, which has repeatedly made it a political target under both terms of the Trump presidency.

Environmental groups have been particularly worried by talk of cuts to the EPA, which they believe is ultimately a threat to the nation's health and well-being. 

“This EPA budget proposal leaves families sicker, not safer,” Michelle Roos, Executive Director of the Environmental Protection Network, said in a statement.

“This is part of the Trump administration’s dangerous and far-reaching plan to let polluters decide which toxic chemicals to dump in our drinking water, which harmful pollution to pump into the air we breathe, and which pesticides are put on the food we eat,” Roos added.

“Because some politicians in Washington don’t support EPA’s mission of protecting human health, many communities across the country have lost the EPA pollution inspectors and experts that have protected families from harm. EPA is stretched beyond its limits and no longer has the workforce needed to adequately protect all communities from toxic chemicals and pollution,” she continued. 

There is no guarantee that Congress will pass the budget in its current form. Last year, both the Senate and the House pushed back against the administration's similarly substantial cuts, and even bolstered some programs that had been on the chopping block. Some scientific institutions are hoping for a repeat this year, although nothing is certain.

Commenting on the wider cuts to scientific funding, the Association of American Universities also issued a statement saying: “We urge Congress, as they did with the FY26 budget, to reject these short-sighted cuts and increase investments in America’s scientific enterprise to ensure that our nation continues to lead the world – and that all Americans keep benefiting from the greatest research-and-innovation engine the world has ever known.”

“As President Trump himself has repeatedly acknowledged, federal support for cutting-edge scientific research is crucial to the United States’ long-term success – and that our nation’s scientific enterprise has kept the United States at the forefront of global scientific discovery, innovation, and economic growth since World War II. Recent news that China’s investments in scientific research and development are now outpacing our own only underscores the importance of renewing our commitment to American science,” it added.

Not everyone is set to lose out, though. There is one clear winner in the FY2027 budget proposal: the military, which could see a 44 percent increase, bringing its total to $1.5 trillion.