Space Travel and Tuberculosis Research Are Hit by Trump's Harvard Cuts
But early Tuesday morning, she received an official notice to 'stop work' on her lab's federally funded research on tuberculosis, an infectious disease that kills more than a million people a year worldwide.
Just hours earlier, the Trump administration had vowed to freeze $2.2 billion in research funding at Harvard. If fully executed, it will be the deepest cut yet in a White House campaign against elite universities that began shortly after President Trump took office in January. Other universities, including Princeton, Cornell and Columbia, have also seen deep cuts to research funding.
Dr. Fortune's contract, a $60 million National Institutes of Health agreement involving Harvard and other universities across the country, appeared to be one of the first projects affected. Stop-work notices also began arriving this week at an obscure Harvard office called 'sponsored programs' that coordinates federal research funding.
One Harvard professor, David R. Walt, received a notice that his research toward a diagnostic tool for Lou Gehrig's disease, or A.L.S., must stop immediately. Two other orders will affect research on space travel and radiation sickness, just weeks after the scientist, Dr. Donald E. Ingber, who engineers fake organs that are useful in studies of human illnesses, was approached by the government to expand his work.
The Trump administration, which warned that another $7 billion may be at stake at Harvard, has framed its campaign to cut research dollars as an effort to combat antisemitism. Harvard had appeared to be seeking ways to work with the White House, until a letter to the school on Friday expanded the administration's demands, with new requirements that had nothing to do with antisemitism.
On Monday, Harvard's president, Alan M. Garber, put his foot down, saying that Mr. Trump's administration had gone too far.
He has been applauded for resisting, but his school, along with the nation's other elite research universities, is extremely dependent on federal research funds.
In a news briefing Tuesday, Karoline Leavitt, the White House press secretary, said that Harvard had not taken the president's demands seriously, resulting in the funding cuts.
Noting Harvard's large endowment, which is about $53 billion, she added, 'Why are the American taxpayers subsidizing a university that has billions of dollars in the bank already?'
Harvard is still processing the incoming notices and has not yet disclosed the exact amount that has been cut. Even short-term reductions could be devastating to work that has helped the United States stay competitive and even helped keep people alive, college leaders and researchers said.
Dr. Walt, the A.L.S. researcher, who received a presidential medal last year for his work, said the order put in jeopardy 'a transformative diagnostic test that may never see the light of day.' He added, 'If this project is terminated, which is the likely outcome, and then other projects are terminated as well, people are going to die.'
Even before the explicit attack on Harvard, the Trump administration had been cutting research expenses on campuses across the country, part of a broad effort to reduce federal government spending and end projects that contradict its policy aims, including work that touches on gender and race.
Harvard had already lost millions. An analysis last week by The Harvard Crimson found $110 million in cuts, many of them in projects that involved sexuality or gender.
Cancellations have been executed so quickly and with so little warning since Mr. Trump took office that academics have had difficulty tallying them.
University leaders have been scrambling to assemble in-house lists of stop-work orders that were sent to individual researchers. Complicating matters, the White House has sometimes announced cuts far larger than what the schools receive from the federal government in any given year.
The Association of Public and Land-Grant Universities said on Wednesday that it had been unable to tally the fallout on its members, noting that the figure was 'constantly changing.'
Some administrators have wondered whether the government is inflating its estimates, speculating that it is including previously spent money in its totals. The White House has declined to comment on the concerns of campus administrators.
In some cases, there were no official announcements that cuts were coming at all. The president of the University of Pennsylvania, J. Larry Jameson, has said that initial word of a $175 million reduction for the university came through media reports. Eventually, Dr. Jameson said, faculty members in seven of Penn's schools received stop-work orders that added up to about $175 million.
The experience was much the same at Princeton, where researchers received notifications suspending dozens of grants without any formal word from Washington to the university about 'the full rationale,' said its president, Christopher L. Eisgruber.
Mr. Eisgruber said last week he would not make any concessions to the White House. Princeton and Cornell are among about a dozen universities, along with major university associations, that have jointly sued the administration over cuts to research.
With the deeper cuts now looming at Harvard, Dr. Garber, a physician, is keenly aware of the risks. In a statement this week explaining why Harvard was refusing to comply with the government's demands, he argued that federal research partnerships with universities are beneficial to both schools and society.
'For the government to retreat from these partnerships now risks not only the health and well-being of millions of individuals but also the economic security and vitality of our nation,' he said.
Dr. Ingber said he found the government's decision to end $20 million in contracts for his work on space travel and radiation baffling.
'They're canceling these two programs at a time when the government is announcing that they're going to build nuclear reactors all across the country to provide energy,' Dr. Ingber said. 'And they're also wanting to go to Mars.'
'They know how to destroy,' he added. 'They don't know how to create.'
Despite the consequences, the scientists whose projects were cut agreed that Harvard was doing the right thing.
Dr. Walt said he would begin searching for alternate funding.
'I'm pleased that Harvard had the courage to do this,' he said, 'and am willing to accept it.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CNN
11 minutes ago
- CNN
In a deal with Trump, Europe gets an elusive agreement. But everyone's a little annoyed
Tariffs European Union Prescription drugsFacebookTweetLink Follow The United States and the European Union avoided the worst-case scenario: a damaging, all-out trade war between allies that threatened to raise prices on a large number of goods and slow two of the world's largest economies. The framework delivered a sense of relief for both sides – but few are cheering the arrangement itself. The agreement, which sets a 15% tariff on most European goods entering the United States, is higher than the 10% tariff Trump put in place on April 2 and significantly higher than the average of around 2% from before Trump's presidency. But it's significantly less than the enormous numbers Trump had been threatening if an agreement wasn't reached. A deal with the United States felt like an impossibility in late May. Frustrated by a lack of progress in negotiations with the 27-member European Union, Trump on May 24 told the world he was done talking to some of America's strongest allies. 'Our discussions with them are going nowhere!' Trump posted on Truth Social. 'I'm not looking for a deal,' he said later that day in the Oval Office. 'We've set the deal — it's at 50%.' The statement — and the shockingly high tariff threat — stunned European trade negotiators and rallied Europe's leaders into action. They quickly agreed to kick talks into high gear. Trump, who has taken a particular liking to European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, was swayed after she called him to say the EU would commit to moving 'swiftly and decisively.' Trump soon backed off his threat and said negotiations would continue. But a deal between the United States and the European Union, one of America's top trading partners, had remained elusive for months. The two sides squabbled over America's insistence on high tariffs for steel and aluminum, looming tariffs on pharmaceuticals and the tariff floor for virtually all goods that the Trump administration appears set to raise to 15%. Negotiators were unable to come up with a resolution before the initial July 9 deadline — one of the reasons the Trump administration postponed the effective day for its 'reciprocal' tariffs to August 1. With just days to go before the extended deadline, while Trump was visiting Scotland, he met with van der Leyen and finalized a framework for an agreement — one that was thin on details, heavy on caveats, but was nevertheless a hard-sought relief for both sides. With the agreement in place, two of the world's largest economies avoided a potential economically crippling trade war. The United States held a 50% tariff threat over Europe's head, and Europe threatened America with strategic retaliatory tariffs that threatened to damage key US industries. Both sides appeared to embrace the fact that a deal was in place more than they celebrated it. 'We made it,' Trump said while announcing the deal with von der Leyen. 'It's going to work out really well.' 'I think we hit exactly the point we wanted to find,' von der Leyen said. 'Rebalance but enable trade on both sides. Which means good jobs on both sides of the Atlantic, means prosperity on both sides of the Atlantic and that was important for us.' Markets cheered, somewhat: Dow futures rose 150 points, or 0.3%, poised to open near record territory. S&P 500 futures gained 0.3% and Nasdaq futures were 0.4% higher. The United States and Europe 'seem to have avoided a self-destructive trade war for now in the biggest and deepest commercial and investment relationship the global economy knows,' said Jörn Fleck, senior director of the Atlantic Council's Europe Center. Nevertheless, the details remain murky. Europe will increase its investment in the United States by $600 billion and commit to buying $750 billion worth of US energy products. It eliminates tariffs on a variety of items, including aircraft and plane parts, semiconductors, generic drugs and some chemicals and agricultural products. Industries in the zero-tariff arrangement cheered. 'The zero-for-zero tariff regime will grow jobs, strengthen our economic security and provide a framework for U.S. leadership in manufacturing and safety,' Airlines for America said in a statement. But the 15% baseline tariff applies to most goods, so the EU member states – and American importers — will have to come to terms with the fact that higher tariffs will raise prices for European goods in America. 'Higher tariffs mean higher prices for US consumers—and that will seriously dent EU companies' bottom lines,' said Alex Altmann, vice president of the British Chamber of Commerce in Germany. 'EU companies aiming to stay competitive in the US market will think twice when deciding where to produce or assemble.' The agreement also deals another blow to Detroit automakers, which objected to a similar deal the Trump administration reached with Japan. The 15% auto tariff on EU cars imported to the United States undercuts the 25% tariff American automakers pay if their cars are built in Mexico. Although von der Leyen said pharmaceuticals were included in the early framework, she acknowledged that Trump may ultimately place higher tariffs on drugs imported to the United States, undercutting the agreement. Still, in the eyes of the hard-working negotiators — and for the sake of the global economy — a deal is better than no deal. Now comes the hard part: figuring out the details.
Wall Street Journal
11 minutes ago
- Wall Street Journal
Trump and the EU Dodge a Trade War
The U.S. and Europe stepped back from the brink of a trade war Sunday, as the two sides announced a deal that avoids tit-for-tat escalation that could do larger damage to both economies. President Trump and European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen announced the deal as a major event, but that's true only as a relief. Mr. Trump had threatened a 30% tariff on European Union goods, while Europe had armed for a retaliatory strike on U.S. aircraft, cars, poultry, steel and much more. Europe also could have fired a bigger bazooka that included limits on U.S. investment and a big tax on U.S. companies operating on the continent.
CNN
11 minutes ago
- CNN
In a deal with Trump, Europe gets an elusive agreement. But everyone's a little annoyed
The United States and the European Union avoided the worst-case scenario: a damaging, all-out trade war between allies that threatened to raise prices on a large number of goods and slow two of the world's largest economies. The framework delivered a sense of relief for both sides – but few are cheering the arrangement itself. The agreement, which sets a 15% tariff on most European goods entering the United States, is higher than the 10% tariff Trump put in place on April 2 and significantly higher than the average of around 2% from before Trump's presidency. But it's significantly less than the enormous numbers Trump had been threatening if an agreement wasn't reached. A deal with the United States felt like an impossibility in late May. Frustrated by a lack of progress in negotiations with the 27-member European Union, Trump on May 24 told the world he was done talking to some of America's strongest allies. 'Our discussions with them are going nowhere!' Trump posted on Truth Social. 'I'm not looking for a deal,' he said later that day in the Oval Office. 'We've set the deal — it's at 50%.' The statement — and the shockingly high tariff threat — stunned European trade negotiators and rallied Europe's leaders into action. They quickly agreed to kick talks into high gear. Trump, who has taken a particular liking to European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, was swayed after she called him to say the EU would commit to moving 'swiftly and decisively.' Trump soon backed off his threat and said negotiations would continue. But a deal between the United States and the European Union, one of America's top trading partners, had remained elusive for months. The two sides squabbled over America's insistence on high tariffs for steel and aluminum, looming tariffs on pharmaceuticals and the tariff floor for virtually all goods that the Trump administration appears set to raise to 15%. Negotiators were unable to come up with a resolution before the initial July 9 deadline — one of the reasons the Trump administration postponed the effective day for its 'reciprocal' tariffs to August 1. With just days to go before the extended deadline, while Trump was visiting Scotland, he met with van der Leyen and finalized a framework for an agreement — one that was thin on details, heavy on caveats, but was nevertheless a hard-sought relief for both sides. With the agreement in place, two of the world's largest economies avoided a potential economically crippling trade war. The United States held a 50% tariff threat over Europe's head, and Europe threatened America with strategic retaliatory tariffs that threatened to damage key US industries. Both sides appeared to embrace the fact that a deal was in place more than they celebrated it. 'We made it,' Trump said while announcing the deal with von der Leyen. 'It's going to work out really well.' 'I think we hit exactly the point we wanted to find,' von der Leyen said. 'Rebalance but enable trade on both sides. Which means good jobs on both sides of the Atlantic, means prosperity on both sides of the Atlantic and that was important for us.' Markets cheered, somewhat: Dow futures rose 150 points, or 0.3%, poised to open near record territory. S&P 500 futures gained 0.3% and Nasdaq futures were 0.4% higher. The United States and Europe 'seem to have avoided a self-destructive trade war for now in the biggest and deepest commercial and investment relationship the global economy knows,' said Jörn Fleck, senior director of the Atlantic Council's Europe Center. Nevertheless, the details remain murky. Europe will increase its investment in the United States by $600 billion and commit to buying $750 billion worth of US energy products. It eliminates tariffs on a variety of items, including aircraft and plane parts, semiconductors, generic drugs and some chemicals and agricultural products. Industries in the zero-tariff arrangement cheered. 'The zero-for-zero tariff regime will grow jobs, strengthen our economic security and provide a framework for U.S. leadership in manufacturing and safety,' Airlines for America said in a statement. But the 15% baseline tariff applies to most goods, so the EU member states – and American importers — will have to come to terms with the fact that higher tariffs will raise prices for European goods in America. 'Higher tariffs mean higher prices for US consumers—and that will seriously dent EU companies' bottom lines,' said Alex Altmann, vice president of the British Chamber of Commerce in Germany. 'EU companies aiming to stay competitive in the US market will think twice when deciding where to produce or assemble.' The agreement also deals another blow to Detroit automakers, which objected to a similar deal the Trump administration reached with Japan. The 15% auto tariff on EU cars imported to the United States undercuts the 25% tariff American automakers pay if their cars are built in Mexico. Although von der Leyen said pharmaceuticals were included in the early framework, she acknowledged that Trump may ultimately place higher tariffs on drugs imported to the United States, undercutting the agreement. Still, in the eyes of the hard-working negotiators — and for the sake of the global economy — a deal is better than no deal. Now comes the hard part: figuring out the details.
