The "Skinny" President's Budget Request for FY2026

The President's Budget Request (PBR) is the annual proposal submitted to Congress for the upcoming fiscal year. The PBR outlines the current administration's recommended funding levels and policy priorities. A "skinny" PBR is a stripped-down version of a full PBR, which we will expect later this month. A skinny PBR usually focuses on the top-line funding levels and does not offer a fully detailed budget for every program in the federal science agencies. 

What's in it?

The FY2026 skinny PBR from the Trump administration requests $2.265 billion in cuts (a 44% decrease from FY2025) for NASA Space Science and $1.161 billion in cuts (a 53% decrease from FY2025) to NASA Earth Science. These numbers align with the nearly 50% cuts to NASA’s Science Mission Directorate (SMD) reported from the Office of Management & Budget’s passback two weeks ago by ArsTechnica. The PBR did not specify an overall number for SMD. Instead, this PBR separated SMD into Earth Science and Space Science. With respect to space science at NASA, the PBR states that: 

“In line with the administration’s objectives of returning to the Moon before China and putting a man on Mars, the Budget would reduce lower priority research and terminate unaffordable missions such as the Mars Sample Return mission that is grossly over budget and whose goals would be achieved by human missions to Mars. The mission is not scheduled to return samples until the 2030s.” 

The PBR requests to completely defund NASA’s Office of STEM Engagement, which is currently appropriated $143 million for FY2025. This office is tasked with building our US STEM workforce and attracting students toward careers in science and technology. It is also the office tasked with managing the Space Grant program, which supports students in all 50 states. The administration justifies its decision by stating: 

“NASA’s primary role is space exploration and, similar to prior generations that were inspired by the Apollo lunar landings, NASA will inspire the next generation of explorers through exciting, ambitious space missions, not through subsidizing woke STEM programming and research that prioritizes some groups of students over others and have had minimal impact on the aerospace workforce.” 

The PBR requests a 56% decrease in funding for the National Science Foundation (NSF) compared to FY2025. This budget reflects the administration’s desire to cut funding for “climate; clean energy; woke social, behavioral, and economic sciences; and programs in low priority areas of science.” In the Cuts to Woke Programs Fact Sheet that accompanies the PBR, the Trump administration highlights the cuts to NSF further, claiming NSF’s research grants and Broadening Participation programs have “funded radical DEI and climate change alarmism.” 

The PBR requests a $1.1 billion decrease (a 14% cut from FY2025) to the DOE Office of Science (SC). The PBR says this funding level “reduces funding for climate change and Green New Scam research. The Budget maintains US competitiveness in priority areas such as high-performance computing, artificial intelligence, quantum information science, fusion, and critical minerals.” 

The PBR also requests a $325 million decrease (a 28% cut from FY2025) to the National Institute of Standards & Technology (NIST). NIST is critical to maintaining the standards, sensors, and technology related to the space sciences. Last month, the Trump administration shut down NIST’s Atomic Spectroscopy Group, a group that maintained a database of spectral data that is crucial to deciphering astronomical observations. The PBR says, “NIST has long funded awards for the development of curricula that advance a radical climate agenda. NIST’s Circular Economy Program pushes environmental alarmism with its university grants.” 

If cuts of this magnitude were to be enacted by Congress later this year, it would be disastrous for the US scientific community. It is important to remember that the PBR is not a law; it is a proposal. Congress ultimately has the "power of the purse," and Congress is the body that passes appropriations bills. 

What's next?

Congress will begin reviewing the PBR. The science agencies will also be submitting their Congressional Justifications to the House and Senate appropriations committees soon, which outlines in much greater detail how the agency plans to use the funds requested in the PBR. This process allows Congress to better understand the needs and priorities of the agency. The PBR is also a jumping-off point for congressional hearings and further input from constituents and stakeholders. 

While this is happening, members of Congress can submit funding and language requests to the Appropriations Committees by May (the deadlines vary for each subcommittee). This is where your members of Congress can pass along your constituent appropriations requests. The 12 appropriations subcommittees will then begin drafting spending bills. NASA, NSF & NIST appropriations are overseen by the Commerce, Justice, and Science subcommittee. DOE SC is under the purview of the Energy and Water Development subcommittee. These spending bills will be debated and marked up, first by the relevant subcommittee and then by the full Appropriations Committee. 

What actions can you take?

Starting May 5, AAS will be hosting a week of action, calling on all of us to take a few minutes every day to engage in advocacy, whether that be calling and emailing your members of Congress, or educating yourself on federal science funding through a journal club. You can find details for the week of action here, and keep an eye out on AAS social media channels for daily guidance.

If you haven't already, check to see if your members of Congress are still accepting constituent appropriations requests for FY2026. Most forms have closed, but it's worth checking because these requests can significantly impact funding levels. 

Next, continue to hold congressional meetings, in your district/state or in DC, and call/email your members' offices. The earlier you take action, the better. And as we've echoed in previous posts, meetings have a much larger impact than emails or phone calls. Even virtual meetings will have a larger impact than other forms of advocacy, as emails and calls sometimes get lost in the flurry of messages coming to these offices every week. If you're interested in learning more about how to hold an effective congressional meeting, check out our slides here or contact us directly at [email protected].  

In case you missed it, the AAS policy team has also released Action Alerts to urge your House representatives to sign letters in support of NASA SMD, NSF, and DOE SC. The deadline for members of Congress to sign these letters is fast approaching. Act now! It only takes a minute to send a message using our software.