An assassination attempt on former president Donald Trump and President Joe Biden removing himself from the race and endorsing Vice President Kamala Harris has meant the last two weeks have been filled with election news. We can be certain that the coverage won’t stop as the two contenders – assuming Harris is chosen by the Democratic Party on August 1 – compete for the Oval Office.
November 5, 2024, can’t come soon enough. North American media (and social media) will be completely consumed with the upcoming U.S. election for the next three-plus months. An American media specialist at a PR agency told me that health media are being deployed to cover the political beat. With fewer full-time reporters, it’s all hands on deck for the election.
So what does a Trump presidency mean for science versus a Harris presidency?
Trump is notoriously anti-science. This is what I wrote in 2016 but how did reality pan out? In “Politics v. science: How President Trump’s war on science impacted public health and environmental regulation,” authors Romany M. Webb and Lauren Kurtz write that “The Trump administration regularly suppressed, downplayed, or simply ignored scientific research demonstrating the need for regulation to protect public health and the environment.”
They turn to the Silencing Science Tracker, an American online database created by the Climate Science Legal Defense Fund and Columbia Law School’s Sabin Center for Climate Change Law, which records anti-science actions taken by all three levels of government between 2016 and Biden’s inauguration to show that 346 anti-science actions were taken by the federal government during Trump’s presidency. (An additional 156 anti-science actions were taken at the local and state levels.) These are believed to be conservative estimates.
Federal actions recorded in the tracker are categorized as follows:
- government censorship;
- self-censorship;
- budget cuts;
- personnel changes;
- research hindrance; and,
- bias and misrepresentation.
The following chart records these anti-science actions by quarter.
For specific examples, please visit the tracker and read the article.
It’s not hard to find other examples of how Trump undermined science during his presidency. The Union of Concerned Scientists, a national, not-for-profit, nonpartisan group of nearly 250 scientists, analysts, policy experts, organizers and communicators, reported on six areas they wanted Congress to address, from censoring scientists to diminishing scientific integrity to undermining science-based safeguards, and more.
An article in Science called Trump “the most antiscience (sic) president in living memory.”
What can we expect from another go-round with Trump? If his past record is any indication, it’s not looking good. And here is support for that position.
While not being wholly placed at Trump’s feet, Project 2025 is described as a “right-wing blueprint for a new kind of U.S. presidency, [that] would sabotage science-based policies that address climate change, the environment, abortion, health care access, technology and education.” Further, it is said to be jeopardizing federal scientists’ independence and undermining their influence, according to the writers of a Scientific American article about the document.
Trump is not one of the authors of the blueprint, but more than half were Trump appointees or staff.
Rachel Cleetus, Policy Director of the Climate and Energy program with the Union of Concerned Scientists, says “The independence of science is being attacked across the board in this document. The importance of this science is that’s how we can ensure people’s health and the environment are being safeguarded.”
Biden and Harris
President Biden was expected to be more supportive of science when he was elected. In 2021, I wrote that Biden is bringing science back and that both he and Harris had personal reasons for focusing on cancer and medical research. (In Biden’s address to the nation on July 24, 2024, he stated that the cancer moonshot is still a priority for the remaining six months of his presidency.)
Under Biden, the threat of COVID-19 and global warming were taken seriously. The Biden-Harris Administration launched a year of open science “to advance open, equitable, and secure research.”
Notably, the Biden-Harris Administration announced a national biotechnology and biomanufacturing initiative valued at US$2 billion. They also launched the STEMM Opportunity Alliance to achieve greater equity across science, technology, engineering, mathematics and medicine (STEMM) fields. While $1 billion was put towards this national initiative, additional partners brought the total to $2 billion.
Elizabeth Gingerich, a business law professor and editor-in-chief for the Journal of Values-Based Leadership, catalogues Biden’s actions in her report card on Biden’s presidency. From his measures on climate change, healthcare, manufacturing and science promotion, to civil rights, employment and more, she points to his progress, leadership and achievements while using words like “unprecedented, instrumental and historical” as in “an historical achievement as the greatest year of job growth under any President.”
Can we expect the same from Harris as President?
In short, yes. As a senator and Vice President of the United States, Harris has supported diversity in STEM and she advises Biden on space policy and strategy. It is possible she will choose senator Mark Kelly, a former astronaut with a background in science and engineering, as her running mate.
On the topic of health care and drug pricing, Alina Salganicoff, Director for Women’s Health Policy at the San Francisco health-policy research organization KFF, said to Nature: “I anticipate she’s going to be a staunch defender of maintaining and supporting the Affordable Care Act, which has also been a priority for the Biden campaign.” Peter Maybarduk, Director of the Access-to-Medicines program at the advocacy organization Public Citizen, confirms that “The Biden–Harris administration has been by far the strongest yet in challenging outrageous drug prices and starting the country down a long road toward medicine affordability.”
Harris’ mother was a scientist and apparently a strong influence on her daughter.
Hear from Vice President Harris on how she feels about innovation and technology as she speaks to an audience in Silicon Valley, last year, about the implementation of the CHIPS and Science Act. Her remarks begin at 3:00.
Stacey Johnson
Latest posts by Stacey Johnson (see all)
- Right Turn: Can Bryan Johnson live forever? Will regenerative medicine help him do so? - October 10, 2025
- Right Turn: #pinksocks, diabetes news and other ramblings - June 24, 2025
- Right Turn: Some takeaways from Advanced Therapies Week 2025 - January 31, 2025
Comments