Sen. Susan Collins vowed on Thursday to fight cutbacks to National Institutes of Health research grants, saying she will personally lobby the Trump administration and is helping to form a broad coalition in an attempt to reverse the funding caps.

“I am adamantly opposed to this arbitrary cap on indirect costs,” Collins said in an interview with the Press Herald.

Sen. Susan Collins Jacquelyn Martin/Associated Press

Collins, R-Maine, was referring to a 15% cap on indirect research costs, which would reduce NIH-funded research by about $4 billion. The cutbacks were announced this month but are now tied up in a court case over whether the Trump administration has the power to unilaterally slash programs that had previously been funded by Congress.

Maine is one of 22 states that sued the Trump administration over the cuts.

Collins said reversing the cutbacks is “an extremely high priority for me.” Collins said she is planning a phone call next week with Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to make the case that the funding reductions are devastating to research efforts. Collins said Kennedy had previously told her he would “reexamine” the NIH cutbacks.

Collins said she’s also helping to organize a coalition that would lobby to undo the cutbacks. The group includes Condoleezza Rice, the former secretary of state and current Stanford University official.

The coalition includes “top research institutions, institutions of higher learning, labs and senators to fight this,” Collins said.

“The cap would apply retroactively to existing grants, which would stop vital biomedical research, interfere with clinical trials and likely lead to layoffs,” she said. “This is so shortsighted.”

Federal health officials and White House officials did not respond to questions from the Press Herald on Thursday afternoon.

The Trump administration has not spelled out a detailed justification for the cutbacks.

Billionaire Elon Musk, the Tesla car company founder and leader of the Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE, which is implementing cuts to the federal government, called indirect costs a “ripoff” on X, his social media platform. Musk did not explain in detail why he believes indirect costs are a waste.

An unsigned memo from the NIH explaining the indirect cost cap said that “it is accordingly vital to ensure that as many funds as possible go towards direct scientific research costs rather than administrative overhead.”

Collins has spearheaded several efforts to advance biomedical research in Congress, including funding to study Alzheimer’s disease and Lyme disease.

“I met (on Wednesday) with scientists from Jackson Laboratory. I heard about the devastating effects caused by the cap,” Collins said.

Indirect costs are not unnecessary extras, scientists say. They include overhead expenses such as support technicians, scientific equipment and other costs associated with conducting research. Indirect costs vary by research project, but in 2023 the NIH funded $35 billion in research grants, with $9 billion, or 26%, paying for indirect costs.

SCIENTIFIC COMMUNITY SPEAKS OUT

Maine’s scientific community, including The Jackson Lab in Bar Harbor, MDI Biological Laboratory in Bar Harbor, the University of Maine System, and the University of New England are speaking out against the cutbacks, mirroring efforts by the biomedical industry throughout the nation.

James Herbert, UNE’s president, is thankful that Collins and the rest of Maine’s congressional delegation — Sen. Angus King, an independent, and Democratic Reps. Chellie Pingree and Jared Golden — are demanding that the funding be restored.

“If these cuts happen,  it would be pretty terrible for any research institute or research university across the country,” Herbert said.

University of New England President James Hebert, in a lab in the Pharmacy Building at UNE’s Portland campus on Thursday, says “the (Trump) administration has made it clear their intention is to cut money going to the NIH going forward.” Shawn Patrick Ouellette/Portland

Herbert said the funding clash goes beyond the cap on indirect costs, as the NIH also is canceling grant meetings. Without the meetings, peer reviews of pending research grants, money for research can’t be released. While it’s still unclear whether grant meetings will be restored, Herbert said the Trump administration seems to be opposed to full funding of NIH research.

“The administration has made it clear their intention is to cut money going to the NIH going forward,” Herbert said. “If that happens, it could make (cuts to indirect costs) pale in comparison.”

Jackson Lab, in a written statement, said the cap on indirect costs “threatens the entire biomedical research community and has the potential to disrupt discoveries into the lifesaving treatments all Americans depend on.”

Collins said the “wrecking ball” approach to research funding, if it’s allowed to continue, would be a disincentive for talented young people to choose biomedical research careers.

“I believe young scientists will be very wary of what’s going to happen to their careers at a nonprofit lab or educational institution, and may take a different path,” Collins said.

The NIH, prior to the Trump administration taking over in January, estimated that every dollar spent on research results in $2.46 in economic activity.

Collins also pointed out that cutting funding for programs that Congress previously passed into law — in the NIH’s case the law specifically delineates that the executive branch cannot reduce the funding — violates the Constitution.

“I don’t think it’s even a close call that the law is being violated in relation to the NIH (indirect costs) cap,” Collins said. “The power of the purse is fundamentally Congress’ responsibility.”

COLLINS ALSO OPPOSES MEDICAID CUTS

Also on Thursday, Collins said she opposes the $880 billion in Medicaid cuts that were in the U.S. House version of the budget bill that recently passed.

Collins said she “voted for five different amendments to protect Medicaid” on the Senate floor, when the Senate passed its version of the budget that did not slash Medicaid, which is health insurance for lower-income and disabled people.

Collins said there are some inefficiencies in the Medicaid program, but the House approach of cutting billions from Medicaid would “hurt vulnerable individuals in our state” and would also cause numerous financial problems at hospitals, which rely on Medicaid reimbursements.

The House and Senate will need to reconcile the different versions of the budget before it would go to President Donald Trump to be potentially signed into law. Republicans hold majorities in the House and Senate.