Since the end of the Cold War, the US has dominated space exploration – but its star could be about to wane. Donald Trump has proposed cutting Nasa's budget by a quarter, effectively cancelling current programmes, jeopardising planned missions and leaving scientists "reeling", said New Scientist.
The draft 2026 budget, released last week, allocates just $18.8 billion to the agency, a cut of almost 25% from 2025, slashing Nasa's workforce by almost a third, and halving funding for its science programmes. A day later, the president also "removed his nomination" of billionaire Jared Isaacman for Nasa administrator, leaving the agency in "turmoil".
What did the commentators say? It's the biggest single-year cut to Nasa's budget in history, and (after adjusting for inflation) its smallest budget since 1961, said US space-exploration advocacy group The Planetary Society. This is "an extinction-level event" for Nasa's "most productive, successful and broadly supported activity: science".
The agency "faces stiff competition" from the commercial sector, said space policy expert Wendy Whitman Cobb on The Conversation. Planned and operating missions to Mars and Venus have been "targeted for elimination", with proposals instead for a commercial "Moon to Mars" programme, under which Nasa would use systems such as Blue Origin's New Glenn and SpaceX's Starship to send Americans off-world. Nasa's mission has always been "largely centred on sending humans to space", so it will "need to grapple with what its identity and mission is, going forward".
The budget also targets Nasa science that has "anything to do with climate change", said Miles O'Brien on PBS. It cuts climate monitoring satellites, eliminates green aviation programmes and "zeroes out science education efforts, declaring them woke".
A lot of things "need reorientation", said Mark Albrecht, who helped lead the Trump transition team at Nasa. This could result in "a big push in new science that is managed differently". But California congressman George Whitesides, a former Nasa chief of staff, called it a "full-scale assault on science in America".
What next? The proposed budget must be debated and approved by Congress; Trump has requested it be finalised by 4 July. It could be "watered down, or even scrapped entirely", said New Scientist, "especially considering the proposed cuts would remove funding to many states, including some key Republican strongholds".
And yet, said Whitman Cobb on The Conversation, my research suggests Congress "rarely appropriates more money for Nasa than the president requests". |