On March 12, 2025, Marcia McNutt, president of the National Academy of Sciences, and Michael M. Crow, president of Arizona State University, convened a Zoom discussion to examine the challenges confronting the American scientific enterprise in the early days of the second Trump administration. Their conversation, guided by editor-in-chief Lisa Margonelli and editor William Kearney of Issues, explored the critical role of science in national progress, the risks posed by policy shifts, and the opportunities for reshaping STEM education and research in the United States.
Assessing the Current State of American Science
When asked how concerned they were about the current state of U.S. science and whether the situation represented a fundamental reset, McNutt expressed serious worry. She noted that the federal agencies at the heart of scientific research are experiencing unprecedented cuts, threatening both mission fulfillment and institutional expertise. “I think it’s going to be chaos for quite a long time,” she said, acknowledging the uncertainty about how the scientific ecosystem might stabilize.
Crow echoed these concerns, emphasizing the practical foundations of American culture, as described by Alexis de Tocqueville. He highlighted the historical consequences of neglecting science and technology, noting that without continual innovation, the United States risks failures in food security, national defense, and economic leadership. “History is quite clear,” Crow said. “What we face now is a lapse of memory—a failure to understand the foundations that brought us to where we are.”
The Strategic Importance of Science for National Prosperity
McNutt emphasized that scientific excellence is essential to national greatness. Traditionally, government research budgets have seen modest incremental adjustments, with occasional boosts for emerging fields. However, she stressed that reallocating resources from stagnant areas to rapidly advancing fields is rare. Ideologically driven cuts, she warned, do not strengthen America’s global standing.
Crow reinforced this perspective, noting the critical role of technological advancement in economic growth. Since 1945, he said, 75% of global economic expansion has derived from technological progress, and since 1990, 90% of that progress has depended on fundamental scientific understanding. The United States’ competitive advantage lies in its knowledge-based, science-driven economy—a foundation that other nations increasingly recognize as pivotal.
McNutt drew a global comparison, highlighting two types of prosperous countries: those that invest in science and technology, and those that rely on natural resources. The former group builds sustainable industries and generates long-term human welfare, while the latter relies on finite resources. Crow extended this analogy to U.S. states, citing Texas as an example. Despite its reputation for oil wealth, Texas’ economic and technological success stems from fundamental research, innovative institutions, and a robust focus on green and renewable technologies, illustrating the power of science-driven development.
Opportunities to Influence Policy and Public Perception
When asked how science leaders could influence policy and protect research institutions, McNutt emphasized the need to communicate in terms relevant to the administration, highlighting economic growth, national security, artificial intelligence, and job creation. She noted that appeals framed around climate change or other issues might fail to resonate.
Crow highlighted international competition, particularly from China, which has invested heavily in research universities and artificial intelligence over the past three decades. “Our nation has become confused by the fact that universities are very complex places,” he said. Social or political disputes should not compromise the fundamental mission of research. Otherwise, the United States risks ceding technological and economic leadership.
Both leaders expressed concern about the impact of uncertainty and budget cuts on early-career researchers and graduate students. McNutt warned that the resulting instability could discourage talented individuals from pursuing scientific careers, while Crow emphasized the importance of attracting and retaining top global talent to maintain national competitiveness.
Reimagining STEM Education and Career Pathways
The conversation then shifted to opportunities for rethinking STEM education and graduate training. Crow described Arizona State University’s efforts to make engineering degrees accessible to a broader range of students, including those without perfect standardized test scores. By expanding the engineering program to 33,000 students and graduating over 7,000 per year, ASU demonstrates that talent and ambition, rather than test scores alone, drive success.
McNutt stressed that graduate education must evolve to prepare students for diverse careers beyond traditional research roles. Too often, programs train students solely for government or grant-funded positions, failing to equip them with adaptable skills for the modern workforce. The current crisis, she suggested, provides an opportunity to enhance educational efficiency, effectiveness, and relevance to students’ long-term career goals.
Both leaders agreed that institutions should leverage this period to rethink operations. The National Academies, for example, aims to become more nimble, contributing across the national economy and supporting a broader spectrum of scientific activities. Crow cited historical precedents, including President Lincoln’s engagement with academic leaders during the Civil War, as evidence that structured, goal-driven collaboration between universities and the government can drive transformative progress in agriculture, aviation, space, and medicine.
Interdisciplinary Science for the Modern Era
McNutt highlighted the increasing importance of interdisciplinary research, spanning biology, chemistry, physics, engineering, and environmental science. She advocated for organizational structures that facilitate collaboration across these fields, ensuring that investments in science remain relevant to contemporary challenges. Crow noted that global competitors are not reducing investments in science and technology; instead, they are expanding research infrastructure, often modeled on the U.S. university system.
Historically, the empowerment of universities has been central to American progress. From agricultural innovation to digital technologies, universities have served as the invisible engine driving economic and technological development. McNutt emphasized that many federal agencies, established in the 1800s, are organized in silos, creating inefficiencies. The current moment offers a chance to rethink how research investments are structured for the modern age.
The Stakes of Neglecting Science
Both leaders stressed that cutting back on foundational research risks undermining the entire U.S. economy. Crow pointed to agriculture as an example: the country produces abundant food with only 2% of the population working in agriculture, thanks to scientific advancements and land-grant institutions. This “invisible” infrastructure underpins daily life and national prosperity. If mismanaged, these pillars of knowledge and innovation could be jeopardized, representing a critical strategic error.
A Vision for the Next Decade
Looking twelve years ahead, Crow envisioned a science-driven economy in which every U.S. state benefits from widespread STEM engagement. By reimagining undergraduate and PhD programs, leveraging educational technologies, and expanding opportunities for all students, the nation could cultivate the most capable and diverse generation of scientists and engineers in its history. McNutt echoed this optimism, while acknowledging the immediate challenges posed by uncertainty, budget constraints, and structural inefficiencies.
Ultimately, the discussion underscored a shared belief: the future of the United States depends on sustaining and advancing its scientific enterprise. By investing in research, modernizing education, and fostering interdisciplinary collaboration, America can maintain its global leadership, secure economic growth, and empower the next generation of innovators. In the words of McNutt and Crow, the current crisis is not merely a challenge—it is a critical opportunity to reaffirm the centrality of science and technology to the nation’s success.
Leave a Reply