> NSF is somewhat insulated from the standpoint that NSF directors are appointed every 6 years and the current one will get through most of Trump's term. While

> NSF is somewhat insulated from the standpoint that NSF directors are appointed every 6 years and the current one will get through most of Trump's term. While I support science funding, this is a good time to remind people that politicized science is fat from exclusive to the right[0] (excellent article, don't just skim). A recent example is this paper [1]funded by a $400k NSF grant which tried to "analyze how power, domination, colonialism, and control—undergirded by and coincident with masculinist ideologies—have shaped glacier-related sciences and knowledges over time". Also, for those reading about the "Trump questionnaire" who might not have heard it elsewhere, here is the NYT story about this[2], which much more comprehensive and slightly more balanced than the parent makes it out to be. Among other things, it hints towards "significant shifts of the agency [DOE] towards nuclear power", and a "push to commercialize the research of the Energy Department's laboratories, long considered the crown jewels of federal science." BTW, the downsizing of federal departments has been planned by Trump for a long time, and brought up by him during the campaign, when he said several months ago that he wants to reduce the federal workforce and institute "hiring freeze on all federal employees to reduce the federal workforce through attrition (exempting military, public safety, and public health)". This was in his "Contract With The America Voter", and is nothing to be surprised about. [0]: http://www.city-journal.org/html/real-war-science-14782.html http://www.city-journal.org/html/real-war-science-14782.html [1]: http://reason.com/blog/2016/03/07/this-university-of-oregon-study-on-femin http://reason.com/blog/2016/03/07/this-university-of-oregon-... [2]: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/09/us/politics/climate-change-energy-department-donald-trump-transition.html?_r=0 http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/09/us/politics/climate-change...