January 14, 2026
2 min read
Trump Administration Reinstates $2 Billion in Mental Health and Addiction Funding
Experts have said that if previously reported cuts to federal grants had come to pass, they would have exacerbated the U.S.’s addiction crisis
dragana991 via Getty Images
As of January 15, the Trump administration has walked back a plan to slash U.S. federal funding for mental health and addiction programs, a move that experts have said would have exacerbate the country’s already acute drug crisis.
The loss would have totaled some $2 billion in grants from the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA), NPR reported, citing unnamed sources. The number of grants targeted may have been as high as 2,800, according to STAT.
Before the cuts were rolled back, Daniel Ciccarone, a professor of addiction medicine at the University of California, San Francisco, told Scientific American that “this is going to cost American lives, no doubt.”
On supporting science journalism
If you’re enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.
“It’s an utter shame, given the fact that overdoses are on the decline,” he said. “Now is not the time to let up on our efforts.”
On Wednesday the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention released data showing that estimated drug overdose deaths between August 2024 and August 2025 declined by nearly 21 percent compared with the previous year.
The decline in overdose deaths in the U.S. is not by chance, said Regina LaBelle, a professor of addiction policy at Georgetown University, to SciAm on Wednesday.
“The federal government invested in state and community-based efforts to prevent substance use, treat people with substance use disorder and support recovery. The funding cuts made by the administration today reflect a retreat from these investments,” she said.
Ciccarone noted to SciAm that the opioid epidemic has disproportionately affected red states. “The Trump administration, in both terms, could be claiming some credit for the reduction in deaths,” he said. “It doesn’t make any sense.”
Speaking to SciAm on Wednesday, Caleb Banta-Green, a research professor at the University of Washington, who studies drug trends, said that the then proposed cuts would effectively “gut” lifesaving services for people all across the country. “In addition to saving lives and supporting recovery, treating substance use disorder is the most impactful way to reduce ‘demand’ for drugs, with its upstream impacts on drug trafficking and manufacturing,” he said. Combating drug trafficking has been a priority of the Trump administration.
“The bottom line is that federal investment in mental health and addiction services saves lives,” said Arthur C. Evans, Jr., CEO of the American Psychological Association, in a statement on Wednesday. “Abruptly cutting this support, including to school-based and other youth-focused mental health programs, threatens to destabilize mental health care in our communities and puts our most vulnerable populations at risk.”
The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and SAMHSA did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Editor’s Note (1/15/26): This article was updated to reflect new reporting that the Trump administration has reinstated federal grants for mental health and addiction services. The text was previously updated with additional information on January 14. This is a developing news story and may be updated further.
It’s Time to Stand Up for Science
If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.
I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.
If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.
In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can’t-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world’s best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.
There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.
