Government

Boston Globe reporter Emily Spatz spotlights how a number of key technologies – including the internet and the first widely used electronic navigation system – were developed by MIT researchers with the support of federal funding. The development of the internet has “MIT’s fingerprints all over it,” Prof. John Guttag emphasizes. Prof. David Mindell explains: “Federal funding for these ecosystems has been enormously important over a long time period.” Mindell adds that GPS alone probably “generated more economic value” over a 40-year period than the budgets of the government agencies that helped launch the navigational system.

Prof. Daron Acemoglu, Prof. Peter Diamond and Prof. Simon Johnson are among the six Nobel laureate economists that warn the “massive budget bill passed by Housemakers last month… would weaken key safety-net programs while greatly lifting the federal debt,” reports Alain Sherter for CBS News. The economists also said that “large tax cuts under the legislation, combined with the hits to Medicaid and food stamps, would increase inequality,” writes Sherter. 

Prof. Daron Acemoglu speaks with WBUR On Point host Meghna Chakrabarti about the role of trust in institutions. “Institutions crucially depend on the trust that people place in them,” says Acemoglu. “Corruption is the tip of the spear, because once you start suspecting that people in high office are using their position for corrupt ends, it tarnishes the entire set of institutions. And I think that's the situation we're in, and we're getting deeper and deeper.” 

President Emeritus L. Rafael Reif speaks with Scott Detrow of NPR’s All Things Considered about the importance of investing in university research. In America, “we have the best research ecosystem in the world. It is fueled by public funds. And it includes not just, of course, the university system but academic medical centers. This is where the best and the most advanced research happens,” Reif emphasizes. He adds that “if we don't have public funds supporting research universities none of the innovations are going to happen.”

Prof. Jacquelyn Pless speaks with Grist reporter Tik Root about the future of the solar power industry amid federal proposals to remove tax credit incentives that assist with residential solar costs. “Policy volatility is really my bigger concern,” says Pless. “Policy uncertainty alone can start to freeze investment, raise costs, and damage market confidence.”

Prof. Emeritus Kerry Emanuel speaks with WBUR reporters Vivian La and Barbara Moran about the impact of NOAA cuts on the future of weather forecasting. “They're cutting into bone and muscle when they should be cutting into fat,” says Emanuel. He adds that streamlining operations and saving money “requires deep understanding of the organization and deep consultation with people who understand it.”

Writing for Foreign Affairs, President Emeritus L. Rafael Reif makes the case that “on the battlefield of technology, Americans must both continue to do what they do best and find new ways to improve competitiveness.” Reif explores the United States’ rich history of creating foundational technologies, innovation that frequently stems from research universities. Reif emphasizes: “To avert scientific and technological stagnation, the United States must significantly increase public investments in university-based research, ensure that it capitalizes on discoveries that emerge from academia, and devise sensible immigration policies that allow the world’s best students to study and then work in the United States.”

Prof. David Autor speaks with Rogé Karma from The Atlantic about the role of tariffs in the American manufacturing industry. “Letting free trade rip is an easy policy,” says Autor. “Putting up giant tariffs is an easy policy. Figuring out some middle path is hard. Deciding what sectors to invest in and protect is hard. Doing the work to build new industries is hard. But this is how great nations lead.” 

Writing for The New York Times, MIT Innovation Fellow Brian Deese explains the impact of tariffs and domestic policy on the American auto industry. Deese notes that current policies “risk leaving U.S. automakers isolated and incapable of competing on their own merits as foreign companies bolt ahead. The damage to our economy and national security could be profound.” 

Deborah Blum, director of the Knight Science Journalism Program, writes for The New York Times about the history and future of food safety programs in the U.S. “The United States clearly still needs the safety systems that were so painstakingly built over the last 120 years, and to make them better and stronger,” writes Blum. “The labs and scientists and inspection teams that have been recently lost should not only be restored but expanded. And the mistakes of the 19th century should stay firmly in the history books.” 

Prof. Simon Johnson joins CNBC’s Squawk Box to discuss the potential impact of U.S. tariffs on the global economy. 

Writing for Science, Prof. Fiona Murray and Research Affiliate Stefan Raff-Heinen underscore the necessity of federal investment in university research, noting that “without sustained federal support, the country risks losing its technological edge, threatening economic competitiveness and national security.” Murray and Raff-Heinen write: “Translational research funding is crucial for moving discoveries and early-stage technologies from labs to real-world applications. Government support gives scientists the time to refine nascent technologies, which can be a long and uncertain process. But this approach has had substantial payoffs.” 

Ben Armstrong, executive director of the MIT Industrial Performance Center, speaks with Marketplace reporter Samantha Fields about the impact of tariffs on manufacturing in the U.S. “Things like magnets, which are really critical for batteries and other core electronic technologies, we’ve really lost the capacity to build in the U.S.” Armstrong adds that it’s possible to build that capacity here, but “it takes a long time, and it takes really significant investment,” likely from the government and from companies.

Writing for The Wall Street Journal, Sloan Senior Lecturer Robert Pozen highlights the impact of U.S. tariffs on foreign investment in U.S. Treasury securities and U.S. corporate bonds. “Nevertheless, since target countries will want to respond to reciprocal tariffs, they may stop buying or even sell U.S. debt securities,” explains Pozen. “Either response would increase U.S. interest rates and decrease economic growth. International trade flows and international investing are two sides of the same street.” 

Writing for The New York Times, Prof. Catherine Wolfram and Columbia Prof. Glenn Hubbard make the case that to help end the war between Russia and Ukraine, the U.S. should “impose sanctions on any company or individual – in any country – involved in a Russian oil and gas sale.” They write: “Ideally, the policy would pressure Russia into negotiations, where its removal could be part of a deal. If not, the United States would still collect billions annually, which could help fund Mr. Trump’s proposed tax cuts.”