Fundamental research carried out by American universities forms the backbone of the nation’s exceptional entrepreneurial spirit. This connection becomes clear when examining the current White House advisory landscape.
David Sacks, a venture capitalist from Craft Ventures, leads the White House Council of Advisers on Science and Technology. Scott Kupor of Andreessen Horowitz has been nominated to head the Office of Personnel Management, while Sriram Krishnan, also from Andreessen Horowitz, serves as a policy adviser on artificial intelligence. All have played key roles in funding companies within the digital economy. These businesses rely on foundational internet protocols like TCP/IP, originally developed in part by Stanford’s computer scientist Vint Cerf.
Andreessen Horowitz has also invested heavily in biotechnology, as have the former firms of Vice President JD Vance, Mithril Capital and Narya. The biotech sector owes much of its progress to the human genome’s decoding, a breakthrough that has revolutionized areas such as prenatal diagnostics and cancer therapies. Numerous pioneers deserve credit, including Nobel laureates Marshall Nirenberg (National Institutes of Health), Har Gobind Khorana (University of Wisconsin, Madison), Robert Holley (Cornell University), Paul Berg (Stanford), Walter Gilbert (Harvard), Frederick Sanger (Cambridge), and more recently Jennifer Doudna (University of California, Berkeley) for her work on CRISPR gene-editing technology.
The development of lithium-ion batteries, which power many of Elon Musk’s ventures, was enabled by research recognized with the 2019 Nobel Prize in Chemistry awarded to John B. Goodenough of the University of Texas at Austin and colleagues.
Even widely used medications like statins, which more than 90 million Americans rely on to manage cholesterol, owe their existence to fundamental scientific discoveries. Researchers Michael Brown and Joseph Goldstein from the University of Texas Southwestern received the 1985 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine for uncovering how the body processes cholesterol.
Given their reliance on university-driven research, one might expect venture capitalists closely connected to the administration to vigorously defend these institutions. Instead, many are perplexed by the apparent withdrawal of support as government funding for basic research faces chaotic cuts. While elite universities like Harvard and Columbia have been spotlighted, similar funding reductions are impacting institutions such as Michigan State and the University of Hawaii. It seems as though Washington’s venture capital insiders have indulged in Silicon Valley’s benefits but are unwilling to foot the bill.
Technological breakthroughs hinge on a vital principle: transformative innovations frequently begin with new insights into the natural world’s fundamental laws. Such progress demands freedom for open inquiry and a protective culture, a fact recognized in Vannevar Bush’s seminal 1945 report, 'Science, the Endless Frontier.' Bush emphasized that basic research creates 'scientific capital,' the essential groundwork for practical applications, innovative products, and processes. Patent law echoes this, requiring inventions to be 'nonobvious' to experts in the field.
It is no coincidence that the geographic hubs of venture capital and emerging industries align precisely with locations of leading research universities. Areas like Cambridge and Route 128 in Massachusetts, home to MIT and Harvard, or the corridor from San Jose to San Francisco, encompassing Stanford and the University of California campuses, illustrate this synergy. This pattern attracts global leaders eager to understand the innovation ecosystem and explains why individuals like JD Vance left Ohio for Yale and then Silicon Valley.
Having spent my career within the venture capital environment—first as a biotech entrepreneur, then as an investor—I find the ongoing attacks on research universities deeply troubling. What is even more concerning is the silence from many venture capital colleagues, particularly those with influence in the administration. Considering the serious repercussions for national competitiveness, living standards, and economic outcomes, a strong defense of basic science funding is essential.
Universities are imperfect institutions, and these flaws provide convenient excuses for some in the government who are complicit in dismantling the very foundation of American innovation and economic vitality. While this administration’s tenure may be measured in years, the damage inflicted on the country’s competitive edge could persist for decades.
For decades, American research universities have attracted the world’s brightest minds, whose creativity and energy have enriched the nation immeasurably. Entrepreneurs like Elon Musk and David Sacks were drawn to the United States by these institutions, enabling them to build careers and fortunes.
Historian Barbara Tuchman’s 'The March of Folly' recounts times when great powers knowingly acted against their interests and suffered the consequences. From the Trojans bringing the Greek horse inside their walls to King George III’s taxation of the colonies, these self-defeating actions led to decline. Unfortunately, current trends suggest the U.S. may be on a similar path.
If the government’s campaign against American universities persists without intervention, the nation risks becoming a cautionary tale reminiscent of 'The March of Folly.' This is not a plea for goodwill but a call grounded in clear self-interest.
