This spring, 25 students and postdocs from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology traveled to Washington, D.C., to meet with congressional staffers and advocate for sustained federal investment in scientific research. Over two days, the delegation from the MIT Science Policy Initiative (SPI) held discussions with 62 congressional offices representing 32 states, pressing for stable funding for agencies such as the National Science Foundation and advancing specific policy priorities tied to their own research in artificial intelligence, environmental science, energy, space, and health. The trip, known as Congressional Visit Days (CVD), is an annual program that introduces graduate-level scientists and engineers to the federal policymaking process while demonstrating multiple avenues for connecting research to policy throughout their careers.
The MIT Science Policy Initiative and the Congressional Visit Days Program
Congressional Visit Days is organized each spring by the MIT Science Policy Initiative, a student-led group that seeks to bridge the gap between the scientific community and government decision-makers. Participants attend three preparatory training sessions co-led by SPI, the MIT Washington Office, and the MIT Policy Lab. These sessions cover the federal appropriations process, the role of congressional staff in shaping legislation, and practical communication strategies. Students also practice delivering their research pitches and policy asks in mock “Hill meetings” before heading to Capitol Hill.
This year’s CVD was co-organized by Audrey Parker, a PhD student in civil and environmental engineering at MIT, and Ian Robertson, a PhD student in physical oceanography at MIT and the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution (WHOI). Robertson, who had participated as a student the previous year, reflected on the evolution of the program: “It was rewarding to build on the work of past leaders, strengthening the CVD experience for participants by training and encouraging them to discuss not just general science funding advocacy in their meetings, but also specific policies tied to their research.”
Advocacy Amid Uncertainty: NSF Cuts and the Federal Research Budget
The timing of this year’s visits was especially critical. Recent cuts to National Science Foundation programs, combined with ongoing uncertainty about the broader federal research budget, have put the scientific community on alert. The MIT delegation focused its advocacy on both general science funding for the upcoming fiscal year and targeted policy changes related to their fields. In meetings with offices from both parties, students encouraged staffers to edit language in existing bills, support legislation already on the floor, or sponsor new bills. Staffers on both sides of the aisle expressed particular interest in AI privacy and security across disciplines, as well as hot environmental topics such as deep-sea mining and its associated consequences.
What specific policies did MIT students advocate for on Capitol Hill?
Students advocated for sustained federal funding for scientific research across agencies, and also raised specific policy issues tied to their own work in artificial intelligence, environmental science and engineering, energy, space, and health. They urged congressional offices to edit language in bills, support pending legislation, or introduce new bills. Staffers showed strong interest in AI privacy and security, and in emerging environmental topics like deep-sea mining and its environmental impacts.
In many meetings, the conversations reinforced the practical consequences of funding decisions. By connecting abstract budget numbers to the researchers and projects they support, the MIT delegation helped staffers see the tangible value of continued federal investment in science.
A Bipartisan Interest in Science: Observations from the Hill
First-year PhD student Rodrigo Zuniga, a participant in this year’s CVD, noted a surprising degree of cross-party common ground. “Going to Washington, D.C., offered a whole new perspective of the role of science in politics for me,” he said. “In today’s news and social media landscape, it’s really easy to see Washington as irreversibly polarized, but in talking to staffers from both the majority and minority parties, I saw a general desire for bipartisanship and widespread support for science.”
Zuniga added, “What’s most clear to me after this experience with CVD is that there is a lot of room and pressing need for humans with scientific training and expertise to participate proactively in local, state, and federal government.” His observation echoes a broader theme of the program: that scientists who learn to communicate beyond the laboratory can play a vital role in shaping the policies that affect research and society alike.
How Students Prepared: Training Sessions and Mock Hill Meetings
To ensure productive meetings, participants attended three training sessions organized by SPI in collaboration with the MIT Washington Office and the MIT Policy Lab. These sessions provided background on the federal appropriations process, explained how congressional staff function in shaping legislation, and introduced practical strategies for translating scientific expertise into policy language. A key component of the training was the mock “Hill meetings,” where students rehearsed their pitches and received feedback from peers and policy professionals.
This preparation allowed even first-time advocates to approach congressional offices with confidence. Robertson, who helped lead the training this year, observed that the program has grown more sophisticated over time. “Strengthening the CVD experience for participants by training and encouraging them to discuss specific policies tied to their research” was a deliberate shift away from generic science advocacy toward more targeted, research-informed policy conversations.
Connecting Research to Policy: Career Pathways and Alumni Networks
Beyond the meetings themselves, the Congressional Visit Days program includes networking sessions with Washington-based MIT alumni and members of the MIT Washington Office. These connections introduce participants to careers at the intersection of science and public policy, from federal agency roles to congressional fellowships and policy think tanks. For many graduate students and postdocs, the trip offers a first-hand look at how scientists can engage with government at multiple levels — not only as advocates but as future policymakers themselves.
As scientific and technological issues continue to shape public policy — from AI governance to ocean mining regulation to energy transitions — the need for researchers who can bridge the gap between the lab and the legislature has never been more urgent. Programs like MIT’s Congressional Visit Days equip the next generation of scientists with the knowledge, networks, and confidence to articulate the value of their work to those who fund it and regulate it. The 62 offices visited, representing 32 states, suggest that interest in such dialogue is broad and bipartisan. And as the participants return to their research, they carry with them a deeper understanding of how federal decisions affect their own work — and how they, in turn, can shape those decisions.
