By Gabriel Duffany, he/him, [email protected]
7/1/25
Center for Study of Responsive Law
On June 22, 2025, Republican proposals to slash Government Accountability Office (GAO) funding by 49% were approved by the House Appropriations Committee, sparking widespread concern for the future of U.S. science and technology (S&T) legislation.
Among it’s duties as a government watchdog agency, GAO is tasked with producing detailed reports to Congress on emerging S&T issues, enabling the creation of well-informed policy and providing guidance on responsible innovation. In light of the planned $396.5 million budget reduction, U.S. Comptroller General and GAO director Gene L. Dodaro warned of “grave, pervasive effects in undermining our support of the Congress,” per a June 25 brief to House Appropriations.
With an estimated 2,200 employees at risk of termination, GAO services must scale-back in response to its crippled operating budget. Agency officials noted particular concern over the office’s technology assessment capabilities, which face outright elimination unless sufficient appropriations resume.
For decades, technology assessment obligations were overseen by a dedicated Office of Technology Assessment (OTA), founded in 1972 as a bipartisan research committee staffed by over one-hundred scientists nationwide.
In 1995, OTA’s budget was discontinued amid a similar wave of congressional downsizing. Since then, GAO has been tasked with conducting S&T research on top of its existing duties to Congress identifying waste, fraud, and abuse. A 2019 mandate by the House Select-Committee on Modernization required GAO to form a Science, Technology Assessment, and Analytics (STAA) division to meet the heightened need for S&T advisement.
During 2024 alone, GAO, “provided over 1,100 instances of technical assistance, such as reviewing draft legislation, responding to informal appropriations law questions, analyzing datasets, and preparing questions for hearing witnesses,“ noted Dodaro.
Under the draft budget, Dodaro emphasized, GAO must “stop all technical assistance.”
With the already strained STAA now slated to be functionally abolished, Congress’s sole remaining avenue for S&T research rests on the Library of Congress’s Congressional Research Service (CRS). Lacking a dedicated technology assessment taskforce, many have expressed doubt that CRS can meet the demands of a rapidly changing tech climate, further complicated by its own 10% budget reduction in the June 25 House Appropriations resolution.
While recent measures suggest that congressional priorities have shifted away from reliable, factually driven S&T policy-making, a notable cohort of Representatives have called on their colleagues to revive OTA and ensure cutting-edge research informs national law.
“For more than two decades the OTA provided relevant, unbiased technical and scientific assessments for Members of Congress and staff,” stated a May 2nd letter to House Appropriations leadership. “Today, a restored OTA would offer policy makers the tools to tackle and understand new technological developments and their public policy implications.”
Led by Congressman Mark Takano (D-CA), a coalition of thirty-four Representatives signed onto the letter requesting $6 million be included in the F. Y. 2026 Legislative Appropriations Bill to restore OTA.
Lawmakers emphasized OTA’s valuable service in anticipating new technology’s consequences on American society, identifying artificial intelligence, autonomous vehicles, facial recognition, and more for potential research inquiries. The letter noted, “As complex advances in science and technology continue, Congress should have access to OTA’s thorough and nonpartisan analysis to help us find the right path forward … Funding the OTA is a wise investment for the future.”
While Congress dismantles GAO and other agencies in a bid to cut costs, the coalition favoring OTA revival praised the defunct agency for it’s critical role in saving taxpayer dollars, citing, “Recommendations from a study on computer upgrades at the Social Security Administration led to a savings of over $350 million, and studies on the Synthetic Fuel Corporation led to its repeal, saving the federal government tens of billions of dollars.”
According to a June 22 memo detailing F. Y. 2026 budget modifications, House Appropriations Chair Tom Cole (R-OK) justified the decision to strip GAO allocations as, “Redirecting the Government Accountability Office’s efforts to be reflective of congressional priorities and cutting funding to curtail the agency’s self-directed, liberal initiatives.”
The alleged liberal bias wagered against GAO follows the agency’s ongoing misconduct investigation into the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), with reports indicating OMB illegally refused to disperse funding allocated by Congress for Electric Vehicle credits in violation of the 1974 Impoundment Control Act.
In May, Trump-appointed OMB Director Russ Vought dismissed GAO’s authority to investigate Executive affairs, posting to X, “These are non-events with no consequence. Rearview mirror stuff.”
House Democrats condemned the budget cuts as unfairly partisan, with Appropriations Committee Member Rosa DeLauro (D-CT) remarking, “The only plausible explanation is that the majority and the administration to which it is exceedingly loyal is upset that GAO has repeatedly found that the White House is stealing funds away from taxpayers,” per June 24 reporting by Meritalk.com.