What was asked for, and what arrived.
The last serious federal attempt to move technology investment out of a handful of cities, followed from the report that proposed it to the awards that closed.
Proposed
December 2019
$100B
100%
Over ten years, across eight to ten metro areas, in a 2019 Brookings and ITIF report.
Authorized
August 2022
$10B
10%
Written into the CHIPS and Science Act for twenty regional technology hubs.
Appropriated
Through fiscal 2026
$800M
0.8%
Cumulative across four years. The fiscal 2026 bill carried 41 million of it.
Awarded
July 2026
$169M
0.17%
To six of the thirty one designated regions, after an earlier round was rescinded and rerun.
Nine hundred and ninety nine dollars in every thousand proposed has not been delivered.
An authorization is a promise. An appropriation is money.
This is why the argument on this site is about committed money rather than announced money. Agricultural research pays out over thirty years. A programme that can be authorized, praised, and then quietly not funded cannot hold a commitment that long.
Proposed cut to the National Institute of Food and Agriculture, which makes competitive research grants
$602M
About a third of its budget. Rejected by Senate appropriators.
Proposed cut to the Agricultural Research Service, with laboratory closures attached
$159M
Also rejected. The laboratories stayed open.
Competitive grant applications accepted by that agency after 23 January 2025, while its programmes were under review
None
Funded on paper, closed in practice. Researchers plan around the second one.
Figures and origins on the sources page.