The bureaucratic bloat of federal research funding is finally facing long-term extended calculations, particularly due to indirect academic research funding. The National Science Foundation (NSF) is preparing for a massive miniaturization, with reports showing layoffs up to half of the staff and potential budget cuts from $9 billion to $3 billion.

At the same time, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) is tackling similar disruptions, with the management eye significantly reducing the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), putting thousands of government officials at risk of losing their jobs . This is not just an attempt at financial responsibility. This is a necessary course modification for academic industrial complexes far from their mission to advance meaningful scientific discoveries.

The most important indicator that these cuts are guaranteed comes directly from the NIH itself. In rare moments of transparency, The agency has confirmed on social media that $9 billion in the $35 billion research grant will be in what is called “indirect costs.”– Distance overhead, not real research.

Frankly, almost a quarter of NIH’s funding doesn’t pay for science, but rather supports a bloated infrastructure of bureaucrats, diversity officers and redundant institutional functions. are you kidding me

However, postdocs who do much of this study are even paid a national average of $59,022. I recommend the NIH itself The first postdoc earns $61,008. Postdoctorals are highly trained researchers with a PhD or similar PhD. For comparison, UPS drivers and floor supervisors at fast food restaurants often double this. In response, the administration wisely reduced the maximum indirect cost rate that an agency could charge to 15%. This is a move to save more than $4 billion a year. This number should be doubled.

The meaning of these cuts goes beyond trimming fat from the agency’s budget. They expose the rotten core of modern academic research. For years, American taxpayers have no real-world value, made by elite-class life-long ideologues interested in promoting trendy political narratives rather than producing reproducible results. I’ve been doing fundraising research.

The so-called “reproducibility crisis” in academia is not a problem with fringe. It is the fundamental problem that has made the entire field unreliable. Some analyses suggest that up to 89% of published research findings cannot be replicated, a shocking accusation of the current state of academic science. Previous Amgen Glenn Begley showed that of all the “landmark” cancer studies studies in the past decade, only 11% can be replicated.

Even the BBC, funded by USAID, has been able to function on the crisis, andMost scientists are unable to replicate peer research‘”. Given this reality, why should taxpayers continue their fundraising work that is unrealistic?

These reductions inevitably lead to important layoffs in the research sector, particularly among lifelong scholars who rely on government grants to maintain careers focused on esoteric and useless research.

This may sound harsh, but it is necessary. Now is the time to completely close this broken system. Today’s greatest scientific advancements come from not from bloated universities, but from the private sector, which results in succession, rather than from the suitability of ideologically.

Medicines, artificial intelligence, biotechnology and engineering are emerging the most meaningful breakthroughs not from academia but from the industry. In reality, federal science funding was once a key driver of innovation, but those seeking grants fire unrelated papers and universities benefit from the current situation, leaving it to the self-service ecosystem. It’s there.

This shakeup also sends shockwaves through the publishing industry, particularly major academic journals that are steadily leaning left, prioritizing ideological suitability over scientific rigor.

Over the past decade, these journals have repeatedly published politically motivated research on topics ranging from race and gender to climate change. Withdrawals have skyrocketed, revealing corruption in the peer review process that favors activity over precision. With the declining public trust in these institutions, it is appropriate that the government, their primary source of funding, will be reconsidered.

As I have predicted, the academic elite of the media and their allies frame these cuts as an attack on science itself. But true science is about discovery, skepticism, and reproducibility. This is a principle that has been steadily eroded by politicized research institutions. If the NIH and NSF were really committed to truly progressing, they would embrace these reforms rather than resisting them. A system that rewards authentic innovation over bureaucratic waste is better for both taxpayers and science itself.

One of the most interesting developments in this new era of government accountability is the increasing role of industrial disruptors like Elon Musk. The mask already shows his willingness to dismantle bloated bureaucrats, as seen in a complete USAID overhaul. Now, his perspective lies in cleaning other institutions from the NIH, NSF and the Ministry of Education.

Musk’s move to reduce waste in these institutions is not anti-science or anti-education. For too long, a broken academic system works without scrutiny, sucking up billions from taxpayers, producing suspicious results, and strengthening political orthodoxy.

These budget cuts set American science on a stronger and more sustainable path by forcing NIH, NSF and the broader research community to focus on meaningful industry-related work It will be done.

This is not just a budget cut, but a much-needed course revision for the future of American innovation. And with industry leaders like Elon Musk intervening for efficiency and outcomes of demand, the era of unconfirmed academic waste may finally be coming to an end.

Insert Hankel is a 3x bestselling author and CEO of OverSqualified.com

The opinions and opinions expressed in this commentary are the views of the author and do not reflect the official position of the Daily Caller News Foundation.

All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation is an independent, nonpartisan newswire service that is free to use for legitimate news publishers that can provide large audiences. All republished articles must include logos, reporter signatures and DCNF affiliation. For questions regarding our guidelines or partnerships with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.