Space Quote: Senator’s Warning About NASA Cuts

Posted on by onespaceman2000
Image (Credit): NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland. (NASA)

“When you pull the plug on major space science, it’s like eating your seed corn; it’s so damaging to our entire ecosystem when it comes to American leadership and innovation in this area…We will lose engineers, we will lose others to China. In fact, they are launching a major space exploration initiative.”

–Statement by Maryland Senator Chris Van Hollen commenting on potential DOGE cuts after visiting NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center just outside the Washington, DC Beltway. The Center is home to the nation’s largest organization of scientists, engineers and technologists who build spacecraft, instruments and new technology to study Earth, the sun, our solar system, and the universe.

Planetary Society Decries NASA Budget Cuts

Posted on by onespaceman2000
Image (Credit): Artist’s rendering of the Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope, which is one of the programs that NASA may need to cut as a result of proposed budget cuts. (Institute of Space and Aeronautical Science)

Earlier today, the Planetary Society issued a press release condemning recently announced proposed science cuts at NASA. This is the same week that the Senate heard from the nominee for NASA Administrator, Jared Isaacman, who stated in his written testimony:

I am an advocate for science. During these missions to space, my crew & I performed approximately 50 science and research experiments. I have also publicly supported the Chandra x-Ray Observatory and offered to fund a mission to extend the life and capabilities of the Hubble space telescope.

In its press release, the Planetary Society pulled no punches:

Days ago, the Administration’s nominee to lead NASA called for a “new golden age of science and discovery” at the agency. The proposed budget from within the White House — which cuts NASA science by 47% — would plunge NASA into a dark age instead.

If enacted, this budget would force the premature termination of dozens of active, productive spacecraft. These spacecraft are unique assets: their instrumentation and capabilities cannot be replaced without billions of dollars of new taxpayer investment. No commercial or private space companies can fill this gap.

This budget would halt the development of nearly every future science project at NASA, wasting billions of dollars of taxpayer funds already spent on these projects, abandoning international and commercial partners, and surrendering U.S. leadership in space science to other nations.

This budget would eviscerate space science research, withering the nation’s STEM talent pipeline by removing opportunities to train future scientists and engineers.

The Planetary Society condemns this proposal for NASA and for NASA science. We urge Congress to swiftly reject this proposal and restore funding for NASA’s Science Mission Directorate. We remain committed to joining with all stakeholders to protect and promote U.S. leadership in the scientific exploration of space.

It is time to write to Congress about these cuts. The Planetary Society provided a helpful page to do this.

It is also a good time to get a full time Administrator to fight for the agency if Mr. Isaacman’s comments can be believed.

Today’s NASA Nominee Hearing

Posted on by onespaceman2000

It appears Mr. Isaacman will become the next NASA Administrator based on his careful answering of questions at his nomination hearing, but there was some weakness in his support for a Moon mission in both his prepared testimony as well as his answers to later questions.

In his prepared statement, Mr. Isaacman’s emphasis was Mars with reluctant support for something happening on the Moon:

As the President stated we will prioritize sending American astronauts to Mars. Along the way, we will inevitably have the capabilities to return to the Moon and determine the scientific, economic, and national security benefits of maintaining a presence on the lunar surface.

I read that as him saying a return to the Moon is an option.

Chairman Cruz was far more adamant about a Moon mission in his opening statement, saying:

The Artemis missions and the entire Moon-to-Mars program, which have enjoyed consistent bipartisan support, serve as the stepping stone to landing American astronauts on Mars. In fact, this stepping stone approach is the law as enacted by Congress. We must stay the course. An extreme shift in priorities at this stage would almost certainly mean a Red Moon—ceding ground to China for generations to come. I am hard pressed to think of a more catastrophic mistake we could make in space than saying to Communist China, ‘The moon is yours. America will not lead.’

In the question and answer period, Senator Cruz asked about the return to the Moon and received this weak response from Mr. Isaacman:

I don’t think we have to make any tough trades here, Senator. I think if we can concentrate our resources at the world’s greatest space agency, we don’t have to make a binary decision of moon versus Mars or moon has to come first versus Mars.

So Chairman Cruz continued:

If China beats us to the moon, what consequences might America face?

Mr. Isaacman replied:

We certainly cannot lose…If we do not lead the way and we’re following, we may be following forever, the consequence of which could be extraordinary.

That response sounds a little better, though it may upset Mr. Musk who has a preference for Mars, particularly a Mars mission that has federal funds going to his company.

It appears Mr. Isaacman has forgotten that the Moon is a stepping stone to Mars and not a speed bump. NASA is almost ready for a nearby Moon mission that can be accomplished in weeks, but a Mars mission that will take years is not even close to ready, no matter what Mr. Musk says.

Republicans and Democrats need to hold Mr. Isaacman’s feet to the fire to ensure the Artemis program is fully funded and continues before any designs are set for a Mars mission.

Space Stories: A New Crew Arrives at the ISS, More Changes at NASA, and Student Rover Competitions

Posted on by onespaceman2000
Image (Credit): A Soyuz rocket launches to the International Space Station with Expedition 73 crew members on April 8, 2025 at the Baikonur Cosmodrome in Kazakhstan. (NASA/Joel Kowsky)

Here are some recent stories of interest.

—South China Morning Post: “Rocket Carrying NASA Astronaut Jonny Kim, 2 Russian Cosmonauts Docks with Space Station“

Jonny Kim, a former Navy SEAL, Harvard Medical School graduate and now a NASA astronaut, blasted off with two cosmonaut crewmates aboard a Russian Soyuz rocket early Tuesday, chased down the International Space Station and moved in for a picture-perfect docking three hours after liftoff. With veteran commander Sergey Ryzhikov, 50, at the controls, flanked on the left by rookie cosmonaut Alexey Zubritsky, 32, and on the right by Kim, 41, the Soyuz MS-27/73S ferry ship rocketed away from the Baikonur Cosmodrome in Kazakhstan at 1:47 a.m. EDT (10:47 a.m. local time).

—Politico: “NASA May Consolidate Major Facilities Due to Trump Cuts“

NASA may consolidate work in some regional offices, shifting thousands of jobs, but has no plans for massive layoffs or the elimination of major departments, acting administrator Janet Petro said Monday. The changes in the structure of the space agency’s work force reflect both an effort to cut costs and improve collaboration as the Trump administration pushes ambitious space goals, Petro told POLITICO.

—NASA: “NASA to Kick Off 31st Annual Rover Competition“

NASA’s annual Human Exploration Rover Challenge returns Friday, April 11, and Saturday, April 12, with student teams competing at the U.S. Space & Rocket Center’s Aviation Challenge course near the agency’s Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Alabama. In addition to the traditional human-powered rover division, this year’s competition expands the challenge to include a remote-control division…Participating teams represent 35 colleges and universities, 38 high schools, and two middle schools from 20 states, Puerto Rico, and 16 other nations.

Democrats Question Musk on NASA Ties

Posted on by onespaceman2000

Timing is everything, and the Democrats opening an investigation into Elon Musk’s role at NASA the same week that the Senate grills the nominee for NASA Administrator smacks as bad timing for all the parties involved.

The ranking members of the House Committee on Oversight and Reform are concerned about Mr. Musk having a role in the deconstruction of NASA via the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). In a letter to NASA’s Chief Legal Officer, the ranking members state:

As of February 2025, Mr. Musk and his companies have received a combined total of at least $38 billion in contracts, loans, subsidies, and tax credits from the federal government and state governments…Mr. Musk continues to profit from taxpayer dollars and now finds himself in charge of determining which federal contracts the government will keep and which will be cut—an arrangement that runs afoul of the law.

The letter also discusses Mr. Musk’s financial relationship with Jared Isaacman (wrongly spelled in the letter cited below), the nominee for NASA Administrator, providing examples such as this one:

Mr. Isaacson’s fortune is tied to Shift4, the payments processing company he controls. In 2021, Shift4 entered into a partnership with Starlink, a wholly owned subsidiary of Mr. Musk’s SpaceX. Shift4 estimated that its partnership with SpaceX will generate $100 billion in Starlink subscription payments.

The letter is worth reviewing even if you believe the Democrats have an ax to grind. Would this type of activity, business relationship, and lack of transparency been allowed under the Biden administration? I don’t believe it would have been tolerated then, nor should it be tolerated now.

The standards in today’s government have fallen through the floor, but it doesn’t have to remain that way. NASA and the American public deserve better.

Note: The same Committee is also launching an investigation into the use of Starlink at federal facilities. A letter from the Committee ranking members to the White House states:

We write to express our deep concerns and request clarification regarding the recent installation of Starlink’s satellite internet service at the White House complex, the General Services Administration (GSA), and potentially other federal government agencies. Given Elon Musk’s dual role as the owner of Starlink and the apparent leader of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) in the Trump Administration, the expanded use of Starlink across the federal government raises significant ethical, security, and regulatory implications that warrant immediate attention.