The Trump administration is considering a drastic move to slash the workforce of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) by half, according to reports from former agency officials, a member of Congress, and a congressional staff member. This proposed cut would reduce the number of NOAA employees from approximately 12,000 to 6,000, potentially crippling an agency that provides crucial climate and weather information across the U.S. economy.
Craig McLean, a former assistant administrator of NOAA Research who retired in 2022 after a 40-year career at the agency, described the proposed cuts as an attempt to “crush [NOAA] with a hammer” without considering the impact on the agency’s mission. NOAA’s products, which include the National Weather Service and the National Hurricane Center, are essential for a wide range of industries and are heavily relied upon by scientists, governments, and businesses worldwide.
The potential downsizing of NOAA’s workforce aligns with a conservative policy proposal known as Project 2025, which advocates for breaking up and downsizing NOAA, primarily due to its climate change research. While the specifics of the proposal to halve the workforce have been discussed informally, they have not been formally documented to prevent leaks.
The proposed cuts also include a 30% reduction in NOAA’s budget, which could have far-reaching implications for the U.S. economy. McLean emphasized that NOAA’s products are crucial for various sectors, including finance, real estate, transportation, agriculture, and the oil and gas industry. Losing or compromising NOAA’s data due to staff shortages could have devastating consequences for these industries.
McLean’s tenure at NOAA was marked by controversy, including his demotion from the position of acting chief scientist during the first Trump administration after launching an investigation into senior NOAA officials involved in the “Sharpiegate” scandal. This scandal involved President Donald Trump using a marker on a hurricane map to support false claims about the path of a storm, implicating NOAA officials in the process.
In addition to climate and weather services, NOAA plays a significant role in managing the nation’s commercial fisheries, sometimes conflicting with the energy industry. Legal battles over issues such as oil and gas drilling in critical habitats and the impact of offshore wind turbines on marine life have underscored NOAA’s importance in environmental conservation.
Despite the proposed cuts to NOAA, Trump’s nominee to head the Commerce Department, Howard Lutnick, has pledged not to break up the agency. Calls for an investigation into the potential workforce reductions at NOAA have been made by House Natural Resources ranking member Jared Huffman, who raised concerns about the legality of such actions.
The Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), an auditing team led by tech mogul Elon Musk and aligned with the Trump administration, has been scrutinizing federal programs for inefficiencies and alignment with administration priorities. Their recent visit to NOAA headquarters suggests a heightened focus on potential cuts to staffing levels within the agency.
As discussions around the future of NOAA’s workforce continue, the implications of such drastic cuts could reverberate throughout the U.S. economy and beyond, highlighting the critical role that NOAA plays in providing essential climate and weather information to a wide range of stakeholders. The Department of Government Ethics (DOGE) officials remained silent when asked for a comment regarding recent calls for a broader investigation into their activities. This comes in the wake of concerns raised by individuals such as Huffman, who is advocating for a thorough examination of potential conflicts of interest involving Elon Musk’s companies, including SpaceX and Starlink, and their interactions with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).
In a related development, SpaceX successfully launched a NOAA weather and climate satellite in June, further raising questions about the relationship between private corporations and government agencies. These events have prompted concerns about the integrity of NOAA’s mission and activities.
The current administration, under President Trump, has initiated a campaign to remove federal employees deemed as underperforming. A recent memo from the Office of Personnel and Management requires agencies to submit a list of employees who have received less than a “fully successful” performance rating in the past three years. This move is part of a broader plan to streamline the federal workforce and eliminate individuals who are perceived as obstacles to the administration’s goals.
The implementation of Project 2025, a conservative policy initiative, has further fueled speculations about the future of NOAA. The plan includes dismantling NOAA and discontinuing a significant portion of its climate change research. Additionally, it proposes commercializing National Weather Service data and altering the reporting practices of the National Hurricane Center to maintain neutrality in climate-related discussions.
As a result of these changes, several scientific studies at NOAA have been terminated, and staff members focusing on diversity, equity, and inclusion have been placed on leave. Concerns have been raised about potential surveillance of internal communications within the agency by DOGE members, raising fears of a crackdown on dissenting voices and critical viewpoints.
Former NOAA senior official Andrew Rosenberg warns that the rapid pace of the administration’s actions puts critical services at risk of disruption and key employees at risk of termination without due process. He cautions that once these agencies are dismantled, it may be challenging to restore their functions and purpose, even if legal challenges are successful.
The urgency of the situation underscores the need for vigilant oversight and accountability in safeguarding the integrity of government agencies like NOAA. The implications of these actions extend beyond internal restructuring and have far-reaching consequences for the nation’s scientific community and environmental policy landscape.
This article draws insights from recent developments and expert opinions to shed light on the challenges facing NOAA and the broader implications of the current administration’s policies. It serves as a call to action for stakeholders to monitor and advocate for the preservation of critical government functions and the protection of scientific integrity.
