Trump Fires National Science Board Members
National Science Board Logo. Photo via Wikimedia Commons - Brandon Powell of NSF
On April 24, several members of the National Science Foundation were fired. This unprecedented event is another among several concerning actions taken by the administration.
The National Science Board is an independent, self-governing board that oversees the National Science Foundation (NSF). The NSF is known for making financial grants to researchers, academic institutions and other organizations, funding more than 11,000 grants per year that support nearly 1,900 colleges, universities and research institutions.
Created in 1950 under the Truman Administration, the role of the National Science Board is to advise the President and Congress. The members are nominated by incumbent presidents and chosen for excellence in their area of expertise. It is important to note that current board members can be reappointed and serve again. However, measures are taken to ensure that their priorities remain those of scientific progress as opposed to the progress of a particular political party.
Some terminated members responded with shock, stating that the action was unprecedented. Others claimed they saw it coming and held an air of surety as they departed.
According to ABC News, the email received by all dismissed members read, “On behalf of President Donald J. Trump, I am writing to inform you that your position as a member of the National Science Board is terminated, effective immediately. Thank you for your service.”
When thinking of the future of NSF, the members and other government officials expressed great concern, both about the involvement of party politics and communicating their opinions with particularly strong language.
Keivan Stassun, one of the recently dismissed board members, noted the ease with which the administration could carry out its intended cuts into the National Science Foundation and like agencies, now that there is no board in power to counter such sentiments.
As for future implications of what some have characterized as an attack on the agency, Stassun reported to ABC News that this action could “eviscerate investments in fundamental research and in the training of the next generation of scientists and engineers for our nation,” an overall negative look for the future of funding in the sciences nationwide. Furthermore, Roger Beachy, a Trump-appointed former member, expressed that he hopes to see bipartisan support for the agency upheld, which may also prove beneficial for the budget at the very least.