In late June, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration released its proposed budget for fiscal 2026. In early July, Texas was battered by flash flooding that has killed 132 people as of July 14. These floods have brought national attention to NOAA’s proposed budget cuts and the state of the National Weather Service.
The Daily Illini sat down with Professor Jeffrey Frame of LAS to reflect on the devastating tragedy and clarify the proposed budget cuts. Frame is part of the Department of Climate, Meteorology & Atmospheric Sciences. He teaches and conducts research in meteorology and weather forecasting.
Trump administration and the floods
The Trump administration pushed back on claims that its policies may have negatively affected the response to the floods.
“Blaming President Trump for these floods is a depraved lie, and it serves no purpose during this time of national mourning,” said Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said at a news conference on July 7.
Get The Daily Illini in your inbox!
Three House Democrats sent a letter to President Donald Trump expressing concern about the federal government’s ability to respond to flash flooding and extreme weather events. One of the representatives, Rep. Lloyd Doggett of Austin, said in a press release that he has unanswered concerns.
“The Congressman is seeking information regarding how President Trump’s abrupt staffing cuts and hiring freezes may have affected forecasts and warning alerts in the NWS Austin/San Antonio office,” the press release said. “The Administration has been unresponsive to my repeated attempts to secure information about the extent of the harm it has caused to our local NWS office.”
On Friday, Trump was asked to respond to criticism that warning alerts didn’t go out in time.
“Well, I think everyone did an incredible job under the circumstances…Only an evil person would ask a question like that,” he said.
Over the past year, reports have surfaced regarding staffing cuts to the NWS. BBC reported that staffing levels at the NWS was reduced by 600 from its staff of 4,200. 200 took voluntary redundancy, 300 opted for early retirement and 100 people were fired. The Associated Press reported in April that “nearly half of National Weather Service offices have 20% vacancy rates, and experts say it’s a risk.”
However, Frame says that in this specific tragedy, the forecasts were not the problem.
“The weather service down in Austin/San Antonio usually has two people working on a quiet night,” Frame said. “They had five. That meant three people who weren’t supposed to be there were called in to work overtime…If I’m going to try to list the top 20 things contributing to this disaster, [the forecasts] are not going to be on there.”
Frame said the forecasts accurately issued a flash flood emergency hours before the “wall of water came down.” He added that assessing “exactly where” and “when” the water would arrive downstream was “beyond our limits of prediction with current technology,” but maintained that the forecasts were “very well done.”
“Were there systemic failures leading up to this? Absolutely,” Frame said. “But did it have to do with the weather service or a bad forecast or Trump’s cuts to the weather service? No, that’s not the cause of it. And again, I’m no fan of those cuts.”
The New York Times reported that some key positions were unfilled, and this could have “complicated forecasters’ ability to coordinate responses with local emergency management officials.” These positions include senior hydrologist, staff forecaster and meteorologist in charge as well as a meteorologist warning coordinator.
Frame was aware of the vacant warning and coordination meteorologist position, but maintains that the given forecasts were adequate in this specific weather event.
“There was a piece in the NYT where they were hung up on the warning coordination meteorologist,” Frame said. “But again, is it an important position? Yes. But in terms of this disaster and why people didn’t hear or act on the warnings? No.”
NOAA cuts
NOAA is responsible for everything from daily weather forecasts and severe storm warnings to climate research and coastal restoration. A new budget proposal is attempting to cut NOAA’s staff by 27% — about 2,000 people, reduce the overall budget by well over a billion dollars and stop funding climate research.
“There’s this budget proposal that’s been floated by NOAA…this is coming from the executive branch,” Frame said. “They were zeroing out a bunch of important things like all the NOAA research labs including the National Severe Storms Lab, which runs and develops all of our high resolution models that are very useful in forecasting severe weather.”
Frame rattled off a list of proposed cuts and eliminations. He said current leadership is “advocating eliminating” the Hurricane Research Division, which would reduce the frequency of hurricane hunter flights. Research cuts would have a “devastating impact on forecasting and severe weather research,” according to Frame.
Frame also expressed concern about a proposal to discontinue the Warn-on-Forecast system, according to the congressional justification. The program aims to increase lead time for tornadoes, severe thunderstorms and flash flood warnings — research that Frame called “very valuable.”
“The only conclusion I can reach looking at this budget proposal is that whoever wrote that and designed that is just willfully ignorant in how we forecast hurricanes in severe weather in this country and shouldn’t be allowed anywhere near the upper levels of NOAA,” Frame said.
The justification for these cuts are unclear. The Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025 states, “NOAA should be dismantled and many of its functions eliminated, sent to other agencies, privatized, or placed under the control of states and territories.” Some, including Frame, speculate that they’re an attempt to reduce the deficit.
“Yeah, the deficit is a problem,” Frame said. “But cutting millions of dollars for a deficit in the capital-T trillions is not going to do anything. That’s like saying I’m going to save the Titanic by taking a spoonful of water out of the ship.”
Frame noted the return on investment from spending on weather forecasting. The Center for American Progress estimated that in 2022, the National Weather Service generated $102 billion in public value through forecasting and research — on a budget of just $1.3 billion.
These cuts could trickle down to university-level research through grants that are not renewed or are eliminated entirely. One example is the National Sea Grant College Program, which the University is part of. The proposed budget terminates this program.
“Our department has a lot of grants, some through NOAA, some through the National Science Foundation, some through the Department of Energy,” Frame said. “If we’re just talking about NOAA, it’s possible some of those grants might be rescinded.”
Neil Jacobs, Trump’s pick to head NOAA, responded to criticism regarding proposed budget cuts and layoffs at NOAA.
“If confirmed, I will ensure that staffing the Weather Service offices is a top priority,” Jacobs said. “It’s really important for the people to be there because they have relationships with the people in the local community.”
Jacobs also defended the NOAA cuts, saying that he “supports the president’s budget.”
