The National Science Board fired by Trump was finalizing a report on China’s growing scientific edge over the United States

The dismissal of the 22 members of the National Science Board by the Donald Trump administration is an “unprecedented” move, explains Yolanda Gil, one of the ousted advisers, in an interview with EL PAÍS. Gil, who has a long scientific career in the United States, confirms that all members of the board were dismissed “effective immediately” last Friday by email, with no explanation of the reasons.

Gil, a 63-year-old Spanish scientist at the University of Southern California, believes the timing is no coincidence. The board “had been planning to meet next week in person and we have been taking final votes to release the critical report on Science and Engineering Indicators of 2026,” she says.

The document in question is an analysis of U.S. research and development spending and how it compares with other countries. According to two board members who spoke with this newspaper, the 2026 report warned of a widening gap in this area between the United States — where investment is declining — and China, where it continues to grow.

U.S. superiority over China is one of the issues that most concerns U.S. President Donald Trump and his administration. The president has pushed a major multibillion‑dollar initiative to try to win the race against the Asian giant in artificial intelligence and quantum computing, though the results remain highly uncertain.

Another national priority — both civilian and military — is to land astronauts on the Moon before China does. These are among the few projects with a scientific or technological component that have been spared from Trump’s cuts. Since taking office for a second time, Trump has sought to impose the deepest cuts to research and science the country has seen since World War II. Congress blocked his first attempt, forcing him to maintain funding for the main research agencies. The administration’s second attempt is still working its way through Congress.

One of the government agencies most targeted by Trump is precisely the National Science Foundation (NSF). This independent agency was founded in 1950 to channel public research in peacetime and to shield it from interference by whichever administration was in power. Since then, it has become the country’s main funder of basic science. Its grants have supported the work of more than 270 Nobel laureates and enabled the development of fundamental innovations such as MRI technology, artificial intelligence, and gene editing, among others. One study estimates that one‑fifth of all U.S. wealth stems from public investment in research — a field in which the United States has traditionally led the world. But some analyses suggest that China could overtake it in just two years.

Since Trump took office, the agency has lost 30% of its staff. For the second year in a row, the administration is seeking to cut its roughly $9 billion budget in half. The National Science Board is the collegial body that oversees the NSF and prepares its budgets. Some of the dismissed members now wonder whether they were removed precisely to strip them of that responsibility.

“I think this is one more indication of the sweeping changes that the administration has in mind for the NSF,” Gil argues. “For the second year in a row, the White House has proposed drastic budget reductions for NSF. Given that NSF funds the majority of basic research in science and engineering, and given its emphasis on training students, this is an indication that these are not high priorities for this administration.”

She continues: “Over the last few months, there have been significant reductions of personnel at NSF, which jeopardizes the peer review process that the agency is best known for and gives more decision power to program directors. The White House has nominated Jim O’Neill as NSF director. Traditionally, NSF directors have had a solid research career and a strong familiarity with NSF processes, while O’Neill’s background is in finance and investments.”

Gil explains that the Trump government already dismissed “all the Advisory Committees for each of the NSF’s directorates” months ago. Now the 22 members of the National Science Board have been dismissed as well. The board is the panel that advises the government and Congress on science and innovation, and its members are appointed by the sitting president. Gil was appointed by Joseph Biden in 2025 and was theoretically meant to serve until 2030. After the dismissal, “we don’t know what the plans are,” she acknowledges.

The National Science Board, whose 22 members were appointed by presidents from among leading figures in academia and industry, was one of the main independent advisory bodies to the U.S. Congress and the White House on science matters.

The mass dismissal of the board has been criticized by some of the country’s leading scientific organizations. “This move, combined with other seemingly indiscriminate yet consequential decisions, reinforces the following message: America is abdicating its position as the global leader in science, technology, and discovery. We cannot let this happen,” said Sudip Parikh, CEO of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the world’s largest scientific society and publisher of the journal Science.

The American Chemical Society, which has more than 150,000 members, warned of the Trump administration’s “trend” of eliminating independent oversight bodies, which it calls “essential” to the nation’s scientific leadership.

Roger Beachy, another dismissed board member and emeritus researcher at Washington University in St. Louis, believes that with this sweeping move, Trump is trying to exert greater control over an agency theoretically shielded from government interference to safeguard the progress of scientific research.

“This could be a first step of replacing a non-partisan and non-conflicted board with a board that has an agenda per se, for results that can be accomplished in a short timeframe, rather than a mandate to support the innovative and ‘blue-sky’ research that can lead to unexpected advances that lead to new economies and benefits to society,” Beachy writes in an email exchange. “It is not unusual for this administration to establish boards that are closely tied, philosophically, politically, or financially, to a preset agenda,” he adds.

Beachy also confirms that the National Science Board was finalizing a two‑page summary on the “findings of a statistical unit of the agency that further describes the growing funding gap between support for research between the U.S. and China.”

“It is important to recognize that private companies in several sectors also conduct discovery research, which can complement the efforts of agencies such as the NSF,” he continues. “Because such research targets the goals of each company, it is important that federal support of research, of new ideas and concepts, be part of the science ecosystem, most of which originates in universities and independent institutes of research.”

Keivan Stassun, a professor of physics and astronomy at the University of Connecticut and a dismissed board member, says this sudden purge does not surprise him. “Seeing similar actions by the administration across the federal government and especially with regards to scientific research, it seemed only a matter of time,” he says. “Nonetheless,” he adds, “it’s enormously disappointing.”

Stassun believes this move is far more dangerous than it appears. “The administration has been quite clear in the president’s budget requests — namely, decimating the NSF’s budget — that the intent is to eviscerate investments in fundamental research and in the training of the next generation of scientists and engineers for our nation. Without a congressionally enacted governing and oversight board in the way, it now appears inevitable that this will occur,” he warns.

Board members are placing their hopes in what may happen in the House of Representatives and the Senate, where both Republicans and Democrats have so far blocked many of the administration’s attacks on basic science. “Hopefully Congress will push back [...] and affirm the independent nature of the [National Science] Board,” says Beachy.

Sign up for our weekly newsletter to get more English-language news coverage from EL PAÍS USA Edition