Key Moments
Inside Trump's Science Agenda: Anti-Science Claims, Fauci's Damage, DEI & China w/ Michael Kratsios
All-In PodcastWant to know something specific about what's covered?
We've already dissected every moment. Ask and we will deliver (with timestamps).
Key Moments
The US government is prioritizing innovation in science funding by moving away from traditional models and focusing on empowering individual scientists and tackling ambitious projects, aiming to reclaim global scientific leadership.
Key Insights
The scientific community's perception of the Trump administration as anti-science is a result of politicization, particularly highlighted by the COVID-19 pandemic and the politicization of figures like Dr. Fauci.
The Trump administration's 'Science, a new golden age' report critiques current science funding, noting that $8 billion in NSF grants went to DEI-related initiatives during the Biden administration.
A critical scenario (RCP 8.5) used in climate modeling, which heavily influenced past funding and media narratives, has been deemed unsubstantiated by scientists and removed from IPCC predictions.
The NIH budget has more than tripled since 1998 to $47 billion, yet scientific efficiency (outcomes per dollar spent) has fallen approximately 80-fold, suggesting stagnation.
The administration is testing innovative grant mechanisms like 'golden tickets' at NSF and exploring varied grant durations (6 months to 5 years) to encourage bolder, riskier research.
China's R&D spending has grown from $33 billion in 2000 to $670 billion in 2021, a 19x increase, while US spending grew only 3x, and China now publishes more scientific papers in most domains.
Challenging the 'anti-science' label and combating politicization
Michael Kratsios, Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP), asserts that the administration is not anti-science, pointing to the 'Science, a new golden age' report as evidence of a deep commitment to the US scientific enterprise. He attributes the perception of the administration as anti-science to the politicization of science over the past two decades, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic. Kratsios argues that rigid adherence to certain figures or conclusions, rather than embracing the scientific method's core principle of inquiry, is truly anti-science. He critiques the scientific community's fixation on simply increasing R&D budgets, suggesting that the more critical question is whether the existing $200 billion in annual S&T funding is being deployed effectively to drive breakthroughs. The 'Science, a new golden age' initiative aims to re-center government R&D policy on questioning and optimizing the allocation of resources, rather than just increasing them. This approach seeks to restore trust by emphasizing the inquisitive nature of science over dogma.
Reallocating funding away from DEI and climate alarmism
A significant criticism leveled against current science funding practices is the allocation towards initiatives deemed less critical or politically driven. Kratsios highlights a report by Senator Ted Cruz's committee, which found that approximately 25% of NSF grants during the Biden administration, totaling around $8 billion, were directed towards Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) related initiatives. He argues that this represents a politicization of science, where grant success is tied to DEI factors rather than purely scientific merit. Furthermore, the administration challenges the 'climate emergency' narrative, asserting that while climate is changing due to human activity, the data does not support an emergency. The unsubstantiated nature of the RCP 8.5 climate scenario, once a cornerstone of many climate predictions and funding justifications, is cited as an example of flawed modeling that influenced public perception and research priorities. The administration advocates for investing in technologies that promote abundant energy, such as fusion and nuclear power, which they believe will have a greater practical impact.
Addressing stagnation through meta-science and innovative funding
The report 'Science, a new golden age' posits that American science has stagnated, citing the paradox of rapid technological advancements alongside a decline in efficiency. A key example is the NIH, where the budget has tripled since 1998 to $47 billion, yet breakthroughs per dollar spent have drastically decreased, a phenomenon akin to Moore's Law in reverse. Kratsios suggests this stagnation stems not from a lack of funding, but from a failure to innovate in how science is conducted and funded. To combat this, the administration is establishing 'meta-science' units at NSF and NIH to conduct experiments on funding mechanisms. One such experiment is the 'golden ticket' system, inspired by Danish initiatives, where reviewers can unilaterally select a grant without full committee consensus, encouraging bolder, more innovative proposals. The administration also plans to test varied grant durations, from short-term (6 months) to long-term (5 years), to better match research needs and foster risk-taking. This approach aims to meet scientists where they are and incentivize the pursuit of groundbreaking, high-risk, high-reward research, mirroring venture capital models.
Shifting focus towards foundational research and big bets
While acknowledging the explosion of private capital in AI, the administration emphasizes that government funding should prioritize basic, early-stage, pre-competitive research where the private sector is not incentivized to invest. Kratsios argues that the government must fund 'discovery science' and tackle large, ambitious projects that drive fundamental understanding. Examples of these 'big bold bets' include returning to the moon by 2028, establishing a space-based nuclear reactor by the same year, building a moon base by 2030, and developing a scientifically relevant quantum computer by 2028. A flagship initiative is the 'Genesis Mission,' which aims to double US scientific output by applying AI to the most challenging scientific problems. The administration believes AI will be the most significant unlock for scientific discovery in history, and its role is to help researchers in fields like materials science, chemistry, and physics integrate AI into their work, not to compete with private sector AI development.
Reforming university funding and fostering a scientist-centric ecosystem
The traditional model of science funding, established by Vannevar Bush in 1945, primarily funneled government money to universities. However, with the private sector now funding about 70% of R&D, the administration questions the continued relevance of this model. Kratsios states that the government's focus should be on funding research that the private sector or philanthropy are not incentivized to pursue. He advocates for funding scientists wherever they are – whether in universities, focused research organizations, or even garages – as long as their work is of gold standard quality. This is seen as a move to be pro-scientist, not anti-academic. The administration also aims to address the issue of administrative fees charged by universities on research grants, ensuring funds are used for research rather than overhead. The goal is to create an ecosystem that rewards scientists and provides them opportunities, regardless of their institutional affiliation, emphasizing individual merit over institutional prestige.
The critical race with China and nurturing domestic STEM talent
The growing scientific and technological prowess of China presents a significant challenge. China's R&D spending has surged from $33 billion in 2000 to $670 billion in 2021, a 19-fold increase, outpacing the US's roughly 3-fold growth. China now publishes more scientific papers than the US in most fields. Kratsios stresses that technological and scientific leadership is foundational to economic and national security. To address this, the administration is focusing on incentivizing more Americans to enter STEM fields. A concerning statistic is that only 30% of US STEM PhD recipients are American, a reversal from 30 years ago. The administration is exploring ways to encourage STEM education from an early age, including revisiting programs that supported gifted high school students. They also aim to create legal pathways for foreign-born STEM talent to remain in the US after earning their degrees, recognizing the loss of valuable expertise when these individuals return home. The administration believes securing domestic talent is crucial for maintaining a competitive edge.
Addressing scientific community decline and rebuilding trust
A stark indicator of potential issues within the scientific enterprise is the aging workforce. Kratsios noted that the median age of an intramural researcher at the NIH is 71. This highlights a critical need to bring younger scientists into the fold and foster a new generation of researchers. The perceived politicization and authoritarian approach during events like the COVID-19 pandemic significantly eroded public trust in science. Kratsios argues that figures like Dr. Fauci did a disservice to science by advocating for policies that appeared inconsistent or dogmatic, making it difficult for the average American to take science seriously. He believes that restoring trust requires returning to the roots of gold-standard science, emphasizing inquiry, transparency, and a willingness to question conclusions, rather than presenting science as an unassailable dogma. This approach aims to re-establish science as an inspiring, collaborative process of discovery, not an edict from authority.
Mentioned in This Episode
●Products
●Software & Apps
●Organizations
●Books
●Concepts
●People Referenced
Navigating the Science Landscape: Key Takeaways
Practical takeaways from this episode
Do This
Avoid This
R&D Spending Trends: China vs. USA
Data extracted from this episode
| Year | China Spending (Billions USD) | US Spending (Billions USD) | China Spending Growth (x) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2000 | 33 | ||
| 2021 | 670 | 19 | |
| Over the same period | Approx. 3x increase |
Scientific Publication Output: US vs. China
Data extracted from this episode
| Timeframe | US Publication Lead | China Publication Lead |
|---|---|---|
| ~10 years ago | Approx. 2x more papers | N/A |
| Today | N/A | Approx. 50% more papers (except life sciences) |
Common Questions
The administration asserts it is not anti-science and aims to double the scientific output of the United States. They highlight a report, 'Science, A New Golden Age,' as evidence of their commitment to fostering scientific discovery and empowering young scientists.
Topics
Mentioned in this video
An office within the White House created to coordinate science and technology policy across the administration.
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which ran scenarios like RCP 8.5 that the speaker claims are no longer scientifically tenable.
A renowned medical center and research institution that operates outside of direct government or purely private sector control.
A German scientific research organization that serves as an example of a non-profit research institute.
A primary source of biomedical and public health research funding, which the speaker suggests has seen declining efficiency in terms of outcomes per dollar spent.
The current administration, which the speaker criticizes for allegedly prioritizing DEI factors in grant applications.
A key funding agency for basic research where a significant portion of grants during the Biden administration allegedly went towards DEI-related initiatives.
An agency within the Department of Defense known for its extensive R&D programs.
A university system where professors are reportedly experiencing challenges with students' foundational math skills, leading to calls for the return of SAT scores.
Manages national labs and plays a role in implementing national S&T policy, including initiatives like quantum computing.
An example of a non-governmental, non-private industry research institution that receives significant funding.
An announcement from the National Science Foundation to fund focused research organizations, aligning with the 'A New Golden Age' report.
A critical technology for semiconductor manufacturing that China has struggled to develop, highlighting the effectiveness of US export controls.
A communication platform that originated from a pivot in a different business, illustrating the potential for unexpected success from talented individuals.
Artificial Intelligence, viewed as a critical technology for accelerating scientific discovery and a major focus for both government and private sector investment.
Researchers working at NIH institutions, with a median age of 71, raising concerns about the aging scientific workforce.
Vice President of the United States, who received high support from scientists in a Nature poll.
Former President of the United States, who received low support from scientists in a Nature poll.
A researcher at Google who has won a Nobel Prize and is mentioned as a potential figure who could help shift public perception of AI.
The co-founder of Slack, whose story is used as an example of how talented entrepreneurs can pivot and achieve significant success.
A Senator who, along with his committee, analyzed NSF grants and found a significant portion allocated to DEI-related initiatives.
Science advisor to President Roosevelt, who authored 'Science, The Endless Frontier', shaping the US government's approach to science funding post-WWII.
Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) and former Chief Technology Officer of the United States.
A key figure during the COVID-19 pandemic, criticized by the speaker for contributing to the politicization and mistrust of science.
A supersonic passenger airliner, mentioned as an example of how air travel speed has decreased, symbolizing a potential stagnation in technological advancement.
A critical technology sector where US breakthroughs in areas like transformers have enabled advancements like large language models.
An experimental grant allocation system being tested at the NSF, where evaluators receive a limited number of 'golden tickets' to unilaterally select grants, aiming to encourage bolder ideas.
The principle of relying on observable and measurable evidence, which the speaker argues was neglected during the COVID-19 pandemic.
A flagship initiative aiming to double the scientific output of the United States by applying AI to scientific challenges.
A key theme discussed, particularly in the aftermath of COVID-19, with a call to return to the principles of inquiry and evidence-based reasoning.
The concept that human activity, particularly the burning of fossil fuels, contributes to climate change.
An advanced energy technology that the administration is prioritizing, with a target of achieving it by 2035.
A key energy source that the administration is focused on advancing to provide energy for Americans.
Research related to climate change, which the speaker believes has been misrepresented by focusing on extreme scenarios.
A major focus area for the administration, with goals including returning to the moon by 2028 and establishing a moon base by 2030.
An extreme climate change scenario that the speaker argues was not scientifically substantiated and was used to create a 'crazy narrative' in media reporting.
A concept introduced in the 'A New Golden Age' report, focusing on running experiments to improve how science funding is allocated and conducted.
A key area of scientific focus with a national initiative aiming to create a scientifically relevant quantum computer by 2028.
A seminal work by Vannevar Bush that laid the foundation for the US government's approach to funding basic research, primarily at universities.
A report released by the administration aiming to realign science funding and policy to foster innovation and scientific discovery.
A prominent scientific journal that conducted a poll showing a significant majority of its readers supported Kamala Harris over Donald Trump.
An annual memo from the OMB Director and OSTP Director outlining administration priorities for R&D budgets, emphasizing basic research.
The Graduate Research Fellowship Program at the National Science Foundation, a flagship fellowship program that supports aspiring PhD students and is portable.
More from All-In Podcast
View all 445 summaries
97 minNvidia's Historic Quarter, SaaS Comeback, Bessent vs Druck, America's Debt Crisis, Cancer Vaccine
91 minEric Weinstein: The State of American Science, Breakthrough Coverups, and the Danger of Physics
91 minDario Defends Himself, Datacenter Panic, AI Doomer Trap, Senate Toss-Up
56 minMass Surveillance, Police Misuse, and Who Controls Your Flock Cameras with Flock CEO, Garret Langley
Ask anything from this episode.
Save it, chat with it, and connect it to Claude or ChatGPT. Get cited answers from the actual content — and build your own knowledge base of every podcast and video you care about.
Get Started Free