Stand Up for Science says White House science plan favors corporations over research

Stand Up for Science published a critique of the Trump administration’s “Science: A New Golden Age” report, arguing it rests on weak ideas, undercuts basic research and targets universities. The response, by policy director Cole Donovan, appeared in Tech Policy Press and says the document is more about justifying existing policy moves than offering a real roadmap.

Why it matters: - The dispute centers on how the White House should steer federal science policy, including the role of universities, basic research and private industry. - Stand Up for Science argues the OSTP document could legitimize cuts and other actions that affect public research institutions and federal science agencies.

What happened: - Stand Up for Science published a response in Tech Policy Press to the Trump administration’s “Science: A New Golden Age” report. - The OSTP report was submitted to President Trump earlier this month by Michael Kratsios, director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy. - Cole Donovan, director of policy and advocacy at the Stand Up for Science Foundation, wrote the piece. - Donovan previously served in the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy during the Biden administration.

The details: - Donovan said the OSTP report falls short of the 1945 “Science: The Endless Frontier” report it tries to emulate. - Donovan described the report’s recommendations as vague and lacking substance. - Donovan argued the report builds arguments that support a preferred policy outcome rather than presenting a neutral framework. - Donovan compared the report’s logic to a management consultant or private equity rationale for breaking up a company and removing pieces deemed inefficient. - Donovan said the university establishment is the explicit target of that approach. - Donovan wrote that the report repeats arguments that favor corporate interests over public research. - Donovan said the report reframes structural cuts as reform. - Donovan said the report undervalues universities and basic research. - Donovan said the Kratsios report is a policy document with no real power beyond shaping conversations. - Donovan said the report tries to legitimize the administration’s policy actions. - Donovan said the report borrows authority from historic science policy documents instead of offering a credible roadmap. - Donovan urged attention to rulemakings, grant cancellations and delays, and targeting of critical institutions. - Donovan is available for comment. - Tech Policy Press is a nonprofit media and community organization that says it seeks to advance a pro-democracy movement in tech and tech policy.

Between the lines: - The critique suggests the document is as much a political framing tool as a science policy blueprint. - The focus on universities signals a broader fight over where federal research money should flow and who should control the nation’s science agenda. - By invoking “The Endless Frontier,” the OSTP report is being measured against one of the most influential U.S. science policy texts, raising the stakes for its credibility.

What's next: - The debate is likely to continue as the administration moves from policy language to rulemakings, grant decisions and agency actions. - Stand Up for Science is positioning itself to challenge those moves and amplify dissent from federal scientists. - The organization says its members can learn more at Stand Up for Science.