DENVER — The White House is considering significant cuts to NASA’s science program. If these changes go through, they might cancel several key missions, which goes against what the new nominee for NASA’s leadership has said.
A recent budget draft from the White House suggests a nearly 20% cut to NASA’s total budget, with a shocking nearly 50% reduction in its science programs. This draft, known as a passback, was sent to NASA on April 10 and allows the agency to request changes before the official budget is released.
Currently, NASA’s overall budget sits around $25 billion for fiscal year 2025. The new proposal would slash this to about $20 billion. For its Science Mission Directorate, which is crucial for space exploration, funding would drop from $7.3 billion to just $3.9 billion in 2026.
The astrophysics division would be hit hardest. Last year, it received around $1.5 billion but would be reduced to less than $500 million. One major casualty of this budget could be the Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope, expected to launch in late 2026.
Earth science funding would also take a severe hit, falling to just over $1 billion, more than 50% lower than previous levels. Similarly, the heliophysics division would see cuts of around 50%, dropping to about $450 million. Planetary science might receive $1.9 billion, which is about a third less than last year, leading to the cancellation of notable programs like the Mars Sample Return and the DAVINCI mission to Venus.
This budget plan has raised alarm bells in the space community. During an April 6 event, Rep. George Whitesides (D-Calif.) reported that missions still in the planning stages had been told to prepare termination plans for 2026. Meanwhile, NASA’s acting administrator, Janet Petro, initially dismissed these claims, saying they were based on unsubstantiated rumors. However, later reports indicated that the alleged termination plans were indeed accurate.
Jared Isaacman, the nominee for NASA administrator, expressed strong support for science at a recent confirmation hearing. He described NASA as a vital resource for scientific advancement, promising to boost funding for telescopes and exploratory missions. Yet, his views seem at odds with the proposed budget cuts.
This disconnect has worried both scientists and lawmakers. The Planetary Society stated that such budget slashes could lead NASA into a “dark age,” jeopardizing ongoing missions and hindering the development of future scientific projects. Senator Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) echoed these concerns, stating that cutting funds for NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center would be a grave mistake and promising to oppose the proposal vigorously.
Public reaction on social media has been mixed. Many people express disbelief, claiming that investing in space exploration is crucial for education and innovation. Others fear the implications of stunted scientific progress due to budget constraints, especially during a time when climate change and technological advancements are critical issues.
Historically, NASA has faced budget cuts before, often resulting in program delays and project cancellations. The agency’s journey shows how governmental priorities can shift dramatically, affecting its ability to explore space and understand our planet. In recent years, public interest in space exploration has surged, urging leaders to prioritize scientific funding.
In light of these developments, observers across various sectors await the official budget release and the potential outcomes for NASA’s scientific future.
Check out this related article: Tragic Small Plane Crash Claims Three Lives on Busy Boca Raton Street – What You Need to Know
Source linkDaVInci,Jared Isaacman,Mars Sample Return,NASA,Office of Management and Budget (OMB),Roman Space Telescope
