US Science Policy 2025: Prioritizing AI and Quantum Amidst Budget Cuts

In a year marked by significant uncertainty for American scientific research, 2025 presented a paradoxical landscape. While many traditional research domains experienced funding cuts and grant cancellations, two fields—artificial intelligence and quantum information science—received explicit presidential endorsement and relative budgetary protection. The Trump administration has positioned these technologies as critical to maintaining US global leadership, implementing a strategy centered on public-private collaboration and workforce expansion. However, this focused approach has drawn criticism from researchers who argue that other administration policies may undermine these very initiatives.

The Administration's Strategic Priorities

Since taking office in January 2025, President Donald Trump has consistently identified artificial intelligence and quantum information science as top scientific priorities. This commitment was formalized through an executive order on December 11, 2025, which preempted state-level AI regulation with the stated goal of accelerating technological development. The administration's research and development priority list explicitly places AI first and quantum science second, reflecting a strategic vision focused on maintaining what the administration calls "unrivaled world leadership" in these domains.

The administration's approach represents a significant departure from broader science funding trends. While many research areas faced proposed steep cuts, AI and quantum science received modest increases in the 2026 budget proposal. According to Nature's analysis, the National Science Foundation budget included a 3% increase for AI funding and a 0.4% increase for quantum science—small but notable gains in a generally austere budgetary environment.

Funding Landscape: Selective Protection

The differential treatment of research fields created what some researchers describe as "survivor's guilt" among those working in prioritized areas. Steven Rolston, a quantum physicist at the University of Maryland, noted that while faculty in fields like particle astrophysics face deep uncertainty about funding, quantum researchers primarily experience administrative delays rather than existential threats. This disparity highlights the administration's selective approach to science funding.

However, even prioritized fields have not been completely immune to cuts. Data from Grant Witness indicates that the NSF cancelled 101 grants mentioning 'artificial intelligence' in their abstracts and 68 grants mentioning 'quantum' during 2025. Critics argue that the administration's funding increases for these areas "are negligible in scope," according to David Schatsky, an AI policy researcher at Harvard University, who contends that "the 2026 budget doesn't reflect—in dollar terms—an increase in focus or commitment to AI and quantum."

Public-Private Partnership Strategy

The administration's primary mechanism for advancing its priorities involves expanding public-private partnerships. The most prominent initiative, announced in November 2025, is the Genesis Mission led by the Department of Energy. This project will make scientific data sets from all 17 US national laboratories available to private companies and academic researchers, who will use this data to build AI models for accelerating scientific research. Major technology companies including Microsoft, IBM, and OpenAI have committed to collaborate with federal researchers through this initiative.

In quantum science, the administration has continued and expanded the National Quantum Initiative, which began during Trump's first term. This program establishes quantum-information research centers at five national laboratories that partner with private quantum companies to develop prototypes and test new technologies. The Department of Energy made an additional $625-million investment in this program in 2025, signaling continued commitment to this collaborative model.

Challenges and Criticisms

Despite the administration's focused strategy, researchers and policy analysts have raised significant concerns about its effectiveness. Constanza Vidal Bustamante, a quantum-technology policy researcher at the Center for a New American Security, notes that while an executive order outlining the administration's overarching approach to quantum science is expected soon, broader policy changes may undermine these targeted initiatives. The administration's approach to immigration, international collaboration, and regulatory frameworks could potentially offset gains made through specific funding programs and partnerships.

The selective prioritization also raises questions about long-term scientific ecosystem health. By focusing resources on two technological domains, the administration risks creating imbalances that could hinder interdisciplinary research and innovation in other critical areas. The cancellation of grants across multiple fields, including those with 'AI' and 'quantum' in their abstracts, suggests that even prioritized areas face administrative challenges and uncertainty.

Conclusion: A Fragmented Science Policy Landscape

The Trump administration's 2025 science policy represents a deliberate shift toward technological nationalism, with artificial intelligence and quantum information science serving as flagship priorities. Through targeted funding protection, executive orders preempting state regulation, and expanded public-private partnerships, the administration has created a distinct pathway for advancing these technologies. However, this approach exists within a broader context of scientific funding cuts and policy changes that may ultimately limit its effectiveness.

As the administration continues to develop its quantum science strategy through expected executive orders, the scientific community will be watching closely to see how these priorities align with broader research ecosystem needs. The success of initiatives like the Genesis Mission and expanded National Quantum Initiative will depend not only on funding levels and corporate partnerships but also on maintaining a supportive environment for scientific research across all domains. The coming years will reveal whether this targeted approach can deliver meaningful progress while navigating the complex challenges of contemporary science policy.