The Federal Cybersecurity Cuts in the BBB are Real - and They’re Already Hitting Home
The Trump administration’s budget cuts slash CISA funding and weaken federal cybersecurity programs - from election security to critical infrastructure. Here’s why it matters for every state, school, and company across the United States - not just D.C.
Risk Level
Read Time
“What’s actually happening with these budget cuts?”
The Trump administration’s proposed FY2026 budget initially included deep, targeted cuts to the federal government’s cybersecurity defenses, most notably to the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA). The original proposal aimed to strip nearly $500 million from CISA and eliminate over 1,000 positions, representing a 17% budget reduction and roughly one-third of the workforce.
However, the final budget passed by Congress softened these cuts. CISA’s budget was reduced by approximately $135 million, a 4.6% decrease from the previous year, bringing its total funding to $2.7 billion . While this is a significant improvement over the initial proposal, the agency still faces challenges due to the reduced funding and workforce.
Among the most vulnerable areas? Programs supporting election security, K-12 cybersecurity coordination, critical infrastructure protection, and state and local cyber response. While the budget did not single these out by name, experts warn that the reduced resources and workforce make it likely these mission critical programs will bear the brunt of the impact.
Over 1,000 CISA staff have departed since early 2025 through a combination of layoffs, buyouts, and voluntary resignations. What remains is a hollowed-out workforce facing rising cyber threats with fewer tools and teammates.
This isn’t just a spreadsheet problem - it’s a national security and defense problem.
“Why should anyone outside D.C. care?”
These aren’t just federal programs - they’re the backbone of the country’s digital defense, directly supporting state and local governments, school districts, and critical infrastructure providers.
Election officials have relied on CISA’s Election Infrastructure Information Sharing and Analysis Center (EI-ISAC) to share threat intelligence and respond to foreign interference attempts. However, earlier this year, CISA pulled its funding for the EI-ISAC, leaving the program’s future uncertain.
Schools have leaned on federal partnerships to combat ransomware attacks and recover from breaches. With the recent budget cuts and restructuring, coordination efforts have been significantly reduced, impacting the support available to educational institutions.
State governments, already under-resourced, are now being told to fend for themselves. Many simply can’t, especially not at the level required to keep up with nation-state actors.
The Cyber Safety Review Board (CSRB), akin to the TSA’s Transportation Safety Review Board, was disbanded in January while it was mid-investigation into the massive compromise of American telecom infrastructure by Chinese state actors, known as Salt Typhoon. This move effectively eliminated one of the United States’ most important cybersecurity incident and breach investigative bodies.
“So, what’s the risk here?”
Short term: There’s reduced capacity to defend against cyberattacks, especially large-scale coordinated campaigns. The federal government has inadvertently provided adversaries with a map of its blind spots by scaling back critical cybersecurity programs.
Long term: These cuts have gutted the cybersecurity talent pipeline in the federal government, particularly at CISA. Early career hires and probationary staff have been laid off in significant numbers. Once that expertise walks out the door, it doesn’t just return when funding does. The threat of career instability deters new applicants, especially those with strong resumes and alternative opportunities in the private sector. Competing with the private sector for talent was already challenging; these developments exacerbate the issue for public sector cybersecurity operations.
Meanwhile, advisory boards and oversight groups like the CSRB have been dismantled, reducing transparency and our ability to learn from major incidents. We’re not just cutting spending; we’re eroding institutional memory.
“What’s Hive’s perspective on this?”
Cybersecurity doesn’t stop at the federal firewall. From voting machines in Iowa to water treatment plants in Arizona, every part of our digital ecosystem is interdependent. Slashing funding for national cyber defense might appear as a cost-saving measure, but it’s truly a liability multiplier. The most vulnerable - local governments, public schools, critical infrastructure - will feel the impact first and worst.
We believe cybersecurity should be proactive, not reactive. These cuts do the opposite; stripping away programs designed to prevent the next big attack. Preparedness and operational readiness are key to successfully mitigating attacks, and both are being sacrificed in the name of “cost-cutting.” The unfortunate truth is that gutting readiness and preparedness will likely cost taxpayers more in the long run, as the needs that drove the creation of these programs resurface. Restoring many of these capabilities will inevitably exceed the cost of their continued operation and improvement.
If you work in state or local government, now is the time to advocate for federal support. If you’re in the private sector, speak up about the role public-private cyber partnerships play in securing supply chains and communities.
At the end of the day, threat actors aren’t cutting their budgets - and neither should the United States.
“Where can I go to get more information?”
Start here:
If you’re uncertain about how your organization is affected or what steps you can take to mitigate the impact, reach out. Hive Systems has and continued to support entities ranging from universities to critical infrastructure operators with navigating cybersecurity resilience, and we’re here to help you do the same.
Establish a cyber strategy that saves money
Follow us - stay ahead.
