White House budget could beam NASA science back decades
The US administration appears set to slash NASA’s science budget with cuts to spending in the order of almost 50 percent, according to a draft of the White House’s proposal.
The document, known as a “passback” and first reported by Ars Technica, is still a proposal and requires approval by lawmakers. It does, however, lend credence to talk swirling around the industry in March that the White House was targeting NASA’s science programs.
The reduction could affect many missions, both currently flying and planned. The Planetary Society, which had described the previous talk of cutbacks as “an extinction event for space science and exploration in the United States,” called the latest reported budget decrease as a “dark age for space science.”
“If enacted,” the group said, “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.”
The timing is notable since the White House nominee for NASA administrator, Jared Isaacman, described himself as an “advocate for science” during his confirmation hearing last week. It will be interesting to observe how Isaacman puts this advocacy into action during budget hearings later this year.
A space agency source reacted with an expletive at the proposed expenditure cuts and warned of potential brain drain as NASA scientists and contractors seek work elsewhere. Former Voyager scientist Dr Garry Hunt told The Register that words such as “absurd” and “destructive” were being bandied about by US colleagues:
“It is providing even greater opportunities for ESA, which is supported by a more stable financial program,” he said.
“This is a very worrying time for young space scientists. We may see a substantial brain drain from the US to the UK, Germany, and France in particular as a consequence.”
Hunt added: “Of course, the Chinese program will continue expanding relentlessly.”
Although the passback proposal will keep the Hubble and James Webb Space Telescopes operating, this “assumes no funding is provided for other telescopes.” If enacted, this would kill off the Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope, which is due for launch in 2027.
The proposal could also result in the closure of the Goddard Space Flight Center. Hunt described the mood at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) as “concerned.”
He told El Reg: “They are worried about the budget effects on the missions, which are the lifeblood of the lab.”
The proposal would end funding for the Mars Sample Return mission, which JPL manages. The mission was hanging by a thread after NASA was directed to reduce costs a year ago, but ending it would be a blow to JPL.
Casey Dreier, the Planetary Society’s Chief of Space Policy, told The Register: “If they cancel Mars Sample Return and any number of operating planetary science and Earth science missions, that will certainly impact JPL’s ability to support its existing staffing levels.”
Hunt noted: “If China returns Mars rocks before the US, Trump may simply cancel the NASA Mars mission by saying ‘they have been there first, so why should we bother?'”
The proposal is in stark contrast to statements from Isaacman, who said NASA’s scientific talent and capabilities would be used to increase the rate of discoveries. During the hearing, he said: “We will launch more telescopes, more probes, more rovers, and endeavor to understand our planet and the universe beyond.”
If lawmakers approve the proposals in the passback – which is by no means certain – Isaacman’s enthusiasm for science looks set to run into a brick wall of fiscal reality. ®
