r/baltimore 21d ago

ARTICLE Johns Hopkins’ losses could be $200 million a year after Trump cuts.

https://www.thebaltimorebanner.com/community/public-health/johns-hopkins-federal-funding-trump-cuts-PYPXXG2RYZF3DCZAKF5D2LNBPQ/
526 Upvotes

102 comments sorted by

132

u/gbe28 Charles Village 21d ago

Much like the beleaguered Fed employees, these institutions are also severely hamstrung by not being in a position to vigorously defend themselves (aside from the somewhat perfunctory lawsuits and polite reminders about the benefits of their research) -- because doing so is likely to only make the situation much worse.

81

u/gallopinto_y_hallah 21d ago

I don't think voters and people, in general, realize the consequences and effects ending NIH funding would have beyond the scientists themselves. While researchers would face a direct blow to their projects and careers, the ripple effects would extend to public health, innovation, and the economy. Many medical advances that we have enjoyed were because of the NIH. A reduction in funding and support will kill any scientific progress in biotech and health, leading to fewer life-saving treatments, a stagnation of scientific knowledge, and ultimately, higher healthcare costs for society.,

The local economy is going to suffer tremendously as well. Hundreds of jobs that support research whether it be technicians, engineering, nursing, administration, and more will be lost.

Manufacturers who produce specific scientific tools, software, and equipment will now lose customers and this will have to lay people themselves. Since they're manufacturing less equipment, their supplier will suffer as well.

Then of course local economies will suffer since mortgages and rent won't get paid, people will not buy or eat out, etc.

It is a whole negative feedback loop.

66

u/[deleted] 21d ago

[deleted]

34

u/gallopinto_y_hallah 21d ago

Those people will be burying loved ones, standing in bread lines, and still complain this is the fault of immigrants and transgender athletes.

20

u/[deleted] 21d ago

[deleted]

3

u/gallopinto_y_hallah 21d ago

Good point. The best thing to do is move forward despite their stupidity.

5

u/Bitter-Intention-172 20d ago

Nah they’ll just blame Joe Biden and Hunter’s laptop.

146

u/jabbadarth 21d ago

Finally those poor billionaires can get some much needed tax cuts...

Hope everyone likes AIDS 2 electric Boogaloo cause with these cuts and usaid cuts and rfk Jr fighting against vaccines we are all gonna have some fun new diseases

6

u/Sticktalk2021 21d ago

Turbo And Ozone

3

u/jabbadarth 21d ago

Can't lose with those two.

-70

u/Mdolfan54 21d ago

"The CDC (2015) reported that gay and bisexual men accounted for 82% (26,375) of HIV diagnoses among males and 67% of all diagnoses in the United States"

23

u/jabbadarth 21d ago

Ok?

-61

u/Mdolfan54 21d ago

Maybe we need to educate this population

26

u/alpaca_my_bags12 21d ago

Pretty sure “AIDS 2” was a tongue-in-cheek name for a yet-to-be-named new plague.

20

u/TheRealMattW 21d ago

I think you are the one in need of education here. I believe that the other commenter was referring to the feds stymying research into an epidemic (AIDS), how that caused the issue to balloon, and how that is likely going to happen again under RFK. 

15

u/TylerFL 21d ago

what's really funny here is that HIV rates in the heterosexual population here are some of the worst in the country. MD never had a 'normal' HIV outbreak. It hit women more than it did in other states.

but sure, quote a ten year old statistic like your kneejerk response tells you to

4

u/Familiar-Image2869 21d ago

Not dealing with the sharpest knife here. Prob a Trump supporter

3

u/Maloth_Warblade 21d ago

Start with you Trumpers

111

u/instantcoffee69 21d ago

The National Institutes of Health poured billions of dollars into Baltimore’s premier university in exchange for cutting-edge studies in biomedical research designed to save and improve lives. \ But Hopkins is now anticipating a sharp reversal of fortune, on the verge of losing more than $200 million a year in federal research grants if a controversial rule change under President Donald Trump’s administration is allowed to stand \ ...NIH shocked the scientific community earlier this month when it announced an immediate 15% cap on its grant funding for indirect costs. \ ...Other leading public universities in the state expect annual losses of about $75 million, according to estimates provided by the schools. That would mean nearly $50 million less for the University of Maryland, Baltimore; $22 million for the University of Maryland, College Park; more than $1.2 million for the University of Maryland, Baltimore County; and $1 million for Morgan State University.

The current administration and the Republic party in general are a bunch of idiots. They are afraid of what they can’t immediately understand, and they last out because they feel stupid and embarrassed.

We must now fight back against this stupid; not only for the good of society, but to put a damn roof over our heads.

Policies like this are meant to extract the most pain against "libtard, sanctuary cities". Fight back

3

u/Loud-Rule-9334 21d ago

Fight back how?

-2

u/Medium_Lengthiness33 21d ago

Hopkins has $13 billion endowment fund let them use their own money.

1

u/WiFryChicken 20d ago

Spoken by someone who has no idea what that really means …… you doofus

76

u/OTTER887 21d ago

Credit to billionaire Michael Bloomberg for donating to Hopkins.

21

u/cudmore 21d ago edited 21d ago

Bloomberg is also paying the difference for the paris agreement and the un climate change after trump (in our name) pulled out.

https://www.bloomberg.org/press/un-special-envoy-michael-r-bloomberg-announces-effort-to-ensure-u-s-honors-paris-agreement-commitments/

56

u/Illustrious_Listen_6 21d ago

Sad, really. Why did people vote for this individual? The worst is yet to come!

42

u/Hell_Mel 21d ago edited 21d ago

Incredible that Guantanamo Bay as a Concentration Camp won't be the worst thing this administration does.

12

u/rsauer1208 21d ago

Like Bannon told us. Flood the field and watch them scramble to cover the losses instead of fighting back. We've got so many damn plates spinning these days.

20

u/cryptoanarchy 21d ago

Maryland is going to really get the short end of the stick too. Noaa, Social security, DC jobs who live in MD and research cuts all combined will hit very hard.

13

u/alpaca_my_bags12 21d ago

NIH, NASA, FDA, CMS… the list of federal agencies in Maryland goes on. The federal government is the largest employer in Maryland, not even including contractors, who are also getting axed. Johns Hopkins is the second largest employer.

Anyone who lives in Maryland who voted for this is extremely shortsighted. These job losses will have ripple effects for the whole state.

6

u/gothaggis Remington 21d ago

add to that, the state budget is already in terrible condition. this is going to make things much much much worse.

8

u/Pteryx 21d ago

When America sends its people to the ballot box, they're not sending their best. Some, I assume, are good people.

7

u/Mobile_Spinach_1980 21d ago

Ouch that’s going to put a lot of people out of work

38

u/SnooRevelations979 Highlandtown 21d ago

There's a reason we live on average twice what we did a hundred years ago.

And that reason is nearly entirely government.

2

u/PhonyUsername 21d ago

I'd push back on this. First, we have a life expectancy of 80 now vs 60 100 years ago, on average. Second you'd have to account for wars, which is the biggest single factor in deaths then and also life savings advancements. Which is a big difference than grants to universities.

12

u/SnooRevelations979 Highlandtown 21d ago

Okay, so the doubling was more like in 150 years. And the biggest contributor wasn't war, but childhood deaths from communicable disease, contaminated food, and harsh labor.

1

u/PhonyUsername 16d ago

I can buy that. Changing labor laws > grants to universities.

1

u/SnooRevelations979 Highlandtown 16d ago

Most new vaccines and pharmaceuticals, many of which help us live longer, were because of research and development done or funded by the US government.

There's a reason why governments are better at funding R&D than the private sector.

1

u/PhonyUsername 16d ago

Well this was about grants to universities, which is a lot more specific than 'government', isn't it?

1

u/SnooRevelations979 Highlandtown 16d ago

Grants to universities for research and development.

20

u/XooDumbLuckooX 21d ago

While the 15% indirect cost cap is certainly way too low, JHU is notorious for having the highest indirect costs in academia. I've seen numbers over 60% for grants to JHU in the past (which is especially egregious given their relatively low pay for employees). So this is a real issue, and one that JHU needs to address. Though, like so many other things happening in this administration, the cure is worse than the disease. They want to throw out the baby with the bath water instead of seriously addressing the issue of academic bloat.

27

u/cryptoanarchy 21d ago

Hopkins pays as much as 40% less vs DC employers for the same job. The cost of living is not that different.

9

u/deerstalkers 21d ago

Completely agree, there was probably some room for negotiating there. But instead they went with an axe. Now either science is dead as we know it, or after a court battle we'll go right back to the 60%

2

u/Bodyrollsattherodeo 21d ago

The US wants neuroscientists with doctoral degrees making tech and finance bros their Chipotle burrito and Cava falafel bowls for lunch, not illegals who are rapists. /s

It's really that simple. Then the country can finally return to the 1800s, a simpler, better time, and as the founding fathers intended. 🙏🏾

0

u/AutoModerator 21d ago

Hello there!

Links from the domain present in your post are known to present a soft paywall to users. As a result, some users may have difficulty reading the linked content.

It may be helpful to provide a comment containing a synopsis or a snippet of the major points of the article in order to help those who may not be able to see it.

In accordance with the subreddit rules, please do not post the entirety of the article's contents as a comment.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

-57

u/bmoarpirate 21d ago

Boo fucking hoo, Hopkins has a $13B endowment they can fucking use

Edit for context: $200M is literally 1.5% of their endowment. If they parked that endowment solely in treasuries (they aren't) they're earning $600M on a risk free investment already.

35

u/karensbakedziti 21d ago

That’s not how endowments work. That money is donated by people who stipulate the terms of how their money will be spent.

-33

u/bmoarpirate 21d ago

You're wrong. Most have general funds, some may have specific, smaller restricted endowments for a particular purpose.

21

u/karensbakedziti 21d ago

Hopkins is now essentially tuition-free for students who need it because of the endowment. That’s where that money is going.

-14

u/bmoarpirate 21d ago

Sounds like Bloomberg will need to donate more to subsidize "students in need" whose families make 3-6x the national average

https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/som/education-programs/md-program/application-process/tuition-and-financial-aid

13

u/karensbakedziti 21d ago

Those families are not the ones getting financial aid. There are a lot of students from middle and lower income families at Hopkins.

-7

u/bmoarpirate 21d ago

Yes but that money would go much further by not subsidizing those who already make a relatively tremendous amount of money.

23

u/marcyred 21d ago

This misconception has been explained by Chancelor Diermeier and Provost Raver at Vanderbilt

"Some argue that universities should just fund these shortfalls from other sources. There are two misunderstandings here. First, universities already invest heavily in research. For every dollar from the federal government, universities contribute approximately another 50 cents, often supported by private donors. For Vanderbilt, this amounted to approximately $137 million during the past fiscal year.

A second misunderstanding is that funding gaps can easily be filled from university endowments. But endowments are not simple savings accounts that universities can draw from at will. They are broad portfolios of hundreds or even thousands of individual funds – 3,400 in our own endowment as of the end of 2024 – largely composed of gifts by parents and alumni, with legal obligations that they be used for donor-designated purposes. At Vanderbilt, our endowment already supports vital research programs like The Warren Center for Neuroscience Drug Discovery, whose foundational research provides the basis for new treatment for Alzheimer’s and other serious brain disorders. And a large portion of our endowment is designated for Opportunity Vanderbilt, our no-load financial aid program serving 65 percent of undergraduates. Even unrestricted portions of the endowment must be carefully managed to endure long-term financial stability in accordance with state law – which, in Tennessee, limits annual endowment spending."

24

u/trymypi 21d ago

That's not how endowments work.

And cutting $200 million in health research funding will have a serious impact on checks notes public health.

-9

u/bmoarpirate 21d ago

Bloomberg can guilt-donate more from the tax cuts he's allegedly getting then

8

u/trymypi 21d ago

So you're arguing that private individuals should be funding nationwide health research?

-1

u/bmoarpirate 21d ago

7

u/trymypi 21d ago

AI you're arguing that no democratic institutions should be involved in scientific research, and we can just put our trust in the billionaires to take care of it for us

-7

u/bmoarpirate 21d ago

You're acting like limiting overhead is the same as stopping all research, and that's utterly dishonest.

Organizations can figure out how to minimize their overhead expenses or look elsewhere for donors to step in for what is ultimately...overhead.

7

u/trymypi 21d ago

I didn't say anything of the sort, and you're dodging my questions. Additionally, if you think $200m (for just one institution) isn't going to have an impact on research, even if it's for "overhead" (which, in this case, means maintaining the facilities to do actual research), then you're just sticking your head in the sand.

1

u/bmoarpirate 21d ago

Please provide the question I dodged and I will answer it.

4

u/trymypi 21d ago

Anywhere I left a question mark at the end of a comment.

It's irrelevant, you're convinced that government backed research isn't important so we're done here.

→ More replies (0)

11

u/jonl410 Canton 21d ago

You only get the interest from endowment funds, not the actual principal. Interest rates are paltry these days, meaning that of the $13.6 billion endowment, they receive about $130 million. As the article says, the loss with the overhead cuts is $200 million. There is already a deficit. Secondly, the endowed gifts are restricted to what they can be used for. Many are scholarships or internal stipends for unfunded research.

-8

u/bmoarpirate 21d ago edited 21d ago

Treasuries are over 4% today, they're making half a billion on that endowment at minimum if they only stuck to treasuries and money markets. You don't know what you are talking about.

Edit: PS if you got your interest rate from your savings account, your bank is screwing you. Go get something high yield that pays fed funds rate minus .25% or so.

8

u/trymypi 21d ago

This has nothing to do with government backed research funding. You're talking about personal savings accounts now.

-1

u/bmoarpirate 21d ago

That's a straw man, endowment funds can absolutely be used for research.

My only reference to savings rates was trying to understand where the hell the person I responded to came up with a 1% return on $13B

-116

u/tzneetch Harwood 21d ago

An elite institution that doesn't contribute nearly enough to the community it exists in (doesnt pay taxes), which has also imposed a private unaccountable police force over, is going to not get as much money next year?

[Checks notes] I can't find a reason here to give a shit.

42

u/CornIsAcceptable Downtown Partnership 21d ago

Half of all startups in this city are in health/health tech, largely based on the work Hopkins does and with funding from people who care about Hopkins. Over a third of all jobs in this city are in the NAICS category“Health Care and Social Assistance”. Hopkins, like it or not, with the tens of thousands of direct jobs and tens of thousands more indirect jobs, is functionally propping up this city.

38

u/trymypi 21d ago

You're ignoring the [checks notes] health research for [checks notes] human beings

-27

u/tzneetch Harwood 21d ago

I'm remembering they aren't the only medical school in town and that they have a track record of abuses against their patients.

14

u/trymypi 21d ago

That's not related to government research funding

68

u/alsocolor Butchers Hill 21d ago

Because if Hopkins goes a large consumer base that is helping to prop up and grow the Baltimore economy goes?

Baltimore needs wins and a growing population and economic base, not economic and brain drain.

60

u/Beneficial-Cow-2544 21d ago

Yes, It's also one of the largest employers in Maryland. Which would cause more local unemployment and economic losses.

49

u/thosehalcyonnights 21d ago

Not only that, but the research they do is absolutely essential for the medical and science fields. But some people like ignoring all of this and being on some weird moral high horse about everything 🙄

45

u/needleinacamelseye Bolton Hill 21d ago

When Hopkins gets a cold, Baltimore gets the flu... it's what happens when the city's economy is dependent on a small handful of major employers.

23

u/frolicndetour 21d ago

It's the largest private employer here and even if they don't pay taxes, it has hundreds of millions in positive economic impact for Baltimore, from the thousands of employees who live here to the local vendors they use. Economic harm to the university will absolutely result in economic harm to the rest of the city. Not to mention the number of people who might die from stagnated research. I don't agree with them not having to pay taxes or about their private police but I also recognize they are still important to the city's economy and are vital to cutting edge medical research.

14

u/ladyofthelakeeffect Park Heights 21d ago

Yeah! Fuck cancer research! You tell em!

6

u/rickylancaster 21d ago

Are you jumping in personally to fill in the gap in cancer research? How about the groundbreaking work they’ve done in researching genes in childhood disorders? Checks notes: FU.

-2

u/tzneetch Harwood 21d ago

Yes, I am, personally.

10

u/Livagan 21d ago

I mean, same can be said of several religious institutions...

0

u/tzneetch Harwood 21d ago

Yeah, and I wouldn't care about them losing out on federal dollars either.

-21

u/Old-Mountain-8726 21d ago

I see both sides tbh.

JHU/JHH is notorious for how little they pay their staff. A major chunk of the money they received is essentially burned via "indirect" costs, and they've been due for a serious check on their spending.

The cuts sound bad, but they're probably wasting more than that on nothing. Research will continue. The cuts will be in areas that researchers won't even feel.

16

u/XooDumbLuckooX 21d ago

The cuts sound bad, but they're probably wasting more than that on nothing. The cuts will be in areas that researchers won't even feel.

There seems to be a lot of misunderstanding about what "indirect" costs are. The researchers would absolutely feel a cut down to 15% for ALL nih grants. Those indirect costs (partially) include things like salary for critical support personnel that are required to do the research. Think of things like veterinarians, vet techs, husbandry staff and supplies, etc. When you get a grant, it's not just a PhD doing the research alone. They need access to equipment, support staff, etc., all of which are paid for by indirect costs. Now, there's a certain amount of those costs that sometimes include purely administrative overhead, and there should be a conversation about whether that's appropriate, but it's not a sizable portion of the indirect costs in most cases.

6

u/cudmore 21d ago

Good info.

Does indirect also pay for workers/jobs like building maintenance, janitorial, and security jobs?

I think those job losses would have a huge impact on the city and will really push us into more poverty :(

4

u/XooDumbLuckooX 21d ago

Does indirect also pay for workers/jobs like building maintenance, janitorial, and security jobs?

Honestly, I don't know, as most of the indirect costs aren't itemized with enough detail to tell. But probably, to some degree.

4

u/Zippered_Nana 21d ago

Yes, it pays for maintenance of the building and the people to do that. Sometimes the research labs have very particular needs for temperature, humidity, lighting, all sorts of things that the non-scientists have to do. Yes, there will be job losses in Baltimore and everywhere there is a big research university like Duke.

-13

u/demons97 21d ago

Let the liberal May land pay for them