Trump's defunding of NASA would be catastrophic
On July 10, the Senate Appropriations Committee met to discuss the proposed federal Commerce, Justice and Science budget for 2026. While on average, funding for NASA has accounted for about 0.3 percent of total yearly spending by the federal government since the start of the 2010s, President Trump has called for a 24 percent cut year over year to the agency's operating allowance. By any metric, his plan would be devastating.
Adjusted for inflation, it would leave NASA with the smallest operating budget it has had since Russian cosmonaut Yuri Gagarin became the first human to travel to space in 1961. In the process, it would eviscerate the agency's science budget by nearly half, resulting in the termination of 55 ongoing and or planned missions. It would also leave NASA with its smallest workforce in 70 years. All this, at a time when the agency has been tasked with returning to the Moon and bringing the first humans to Mars.
"There's no historical precedent to this level of single year, functionally indiscriminate and dramatic cuts. You lose, in one year, a third of all active science projects. [The Trump administration is] proposing to turn off missions that are performing not just good science, but unique and irreplaceable science. This isn't so they can reinvest the money in some radical new science efforts. No, the money is gone," said Dreier. "It's almost certainly the greatest threat to NASA science activities in the history of the space agency."
Dreier isn't exaggerating when he says some missions would be impossible to replace. One of the casualties of Trump's cuts would be the New Horizons probe. In 2015, New Horizons gave us our best look at Pluto ever. Four years later, it performed the farthest flyby in human history. As things stand, it's the only active spacecraft in the Kuiper belt, a region of our solar system that is not well-understood by scientists. Even if NASA were to start working on a replacement today, it would take a generation for that vehicle to reach where New Horizons is right now. It costs NASA about $14.7 million per year to continue operating the probe, a fraction of the $29.9 billion in additional funding Congress allocated to fund ICE enforcement and detainment operations in the president's recently passed tax bill.
Another mission that would be impossible to replace is OSIRIS-APEX. If the name sounds familiar, it's because OSRIS-APEX is a continuation of NASA's incredibly successful OSRIS-REx flight. In 2020, the spacecraft visited 101955 Bennu, an ancient asteroid about the size of the Empire State Building, and collected a sample of regolith (rocks and dirt) from its surface using a never-before-tried technique.
After OSRIS-REx successfully returned the sample to Earth, NASA decided to extend the spacecraft's mission and fly to another asteroid, 99942 Apophis. In 2029, Apophis will pass about 19,600 miles from Earth. It will be the closest approach of any known asteroid of its size. NASA said the extension would add $200 million to a mission that had already cost it an estimated $1.16 billion.
"This project is a pennies on the dollar repurposing of an existing spacecraft. It's the only American spacecraft that will be at Apophis for a once in a generation opportunity to study an asteroid that will just barely miss us," said Dreier. "That seems important to know."
At a time when nearly every facet of American life is being upturned, the potential cancellation of dozens of NASA missions might seem a distant concern, but the gutting of the agency's science budget would have a ripple effect on communities across the US.
"NASA is an engine for jobs in the country, and for every NASA job, there are many more that are created in the private workforce," said Bethany Ehlmann, Professor of Planetary Science at the California Institute of Technology. She also serves on the board of directors for The Planetary Society.
Professor Ehlmann's claim is supported by NASA's own data. In 2023, the agency employed 17,823 full-time civil servants nationwide. With NASA's private sector support factored in, that year the agency's missions were responsible for sustaining 304,803 jobs across all 50 states and the District of Columbia. Put another way, for every full-time equivalent job at a NASA facility, NASA supports at least 16 private sector jobs. "Space science has been broadly supported and impacts roughly three quarters of every congressional district in the country," said Dreier. "It's not just a red or blue state thing."
Following last week's Senate meeting, policymakers from both parties said they would push back on President Trump's NASA budget cuts. On Tuesday, the House Appropriations Committee's Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science and Related Agencies passed a funding bill that would provide NASA with a total budget of $24.8 billion for 2026, or the same amount it was allocated this year. The week before, the corresponding subcommittee in the Senate passed its own NASA funding bill.
The two versions differ on one critical detail. The Senate legislation maintains the agency's science budget at $7.3 billion, while the House version seeks to reduce it by 18 percent to $6 billion. Separately, the House is calling for a 23 percent cut to the National Science Foundation's budget. NSF funds much of the nation's astronomy research.
"What I'm hearing from lawmakers is that they understand how important NASA is to industry. They understand how important NASA is to universities in terms of training, and providing grants that train the next generation of the space workforce," said Professor Ehlmann, who was on Capitol Hill last week. The House and Senate will need to come to an agreement for the bill to move forward.
Even with many lawmakers in favor of maintaining NASA's budget, a flat budget is still a funding cut when accounting for inflation. Moreover, NASA has already been negatively affected by the Trump administration's efforts to trim the federal workforce.
According to reporting Politico published on July 9, 2,694 NASA employees have agreed to leave the agency through either early retirement, a buyout or a deferred resignation. Of those individuals, 2,145 are workers in senior positions and 1,818 are staff serving in missions areas like human spaceflight and science. "Once the workforce is gone, they're gone. You lose a ton of institutional knowledge," said Dreier. The employees who have agreed to leave represent about 15 percent of NASA's 2023 workforce of 17,823. With the July 25 deadline for early retirement, voluntary separation and deferred resignations quickly approaching, that number is likely to grow. NASA's shifting priorities under the Trump administration have also created uncertainty among the agency's contractors.
According to former NASA employee and NASA Watch creator Keith Cowing the workforce cuts are already affecting employees. "In the 40 years I've been involved with NASA in one way or another, I've never seen morale so bad," he said. "Is NASA bloated? Yeah, but the way you deal with bloat is to go in with a scalpel and you cut carefully. And yet you have people [like Elon Musk] standing on stage with chainsaws. That is not the way to run government, and it's certainly not the way to create the machinery needed to explore the universe."
Whatever happens next, Dreier worries there's the potential for there to be an erosion in public support for NASA. He points to a survey published by Pew Research. In 2023, the organization found that monitoring for asteroids that could hit Earth and tracking changes to the planet's climate were the two activities Americans wanted NASA to prioritize over other mandates. By contrast, sending human astronauts to the Moon and Mars were the least important priorities for the public.
The House version of NASA's 2026 budget would boost the agency's exploration budget by 25 percent to $9.7 billion. In Trump's tax bill, Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) included language that provided NASA with $4.1 billion for the fourth and fifth flights of the Space Launch System (SLS) rocket — the vehicle intended to carry the first NASA astronauts back to the Moon before before private sector alternatives like SpaceX's Starship are ready to fly.
With both the Trump administration and House pushing Moon and Mars missions as priorities, Dreier says they're "ironically doubling down on the activities that the private sector is already doing — SpaceX says it's going to send humans to Mars — and abandoning the things that only NASA does. There's no private sector company doing space science."
In effect, a NASA budget that sacrifices on scientific research in lieu of Mars missions would be one that invests in things the public says are the least important to it.
"I worry that they're moving away from what the public expects their space agency to do, and that as a consequence, it will undermine public investment in NASA," he said. "NASA is usually tied for the number one or two most popular federal agency. People wear NASA t-shirts. No one wears a Department of the Interior t-shirt walking out of the GAP. It's a rare and precious thing to have, and they're risking it. It's not just the future of the agency that's at risk, but the future of the public's relationship with it."
When asked for comment on this story, Bethany Stevens, NASA's press secretary, pointed Engadget to a letter from Acting Administrator Janet Petro NASA shared in a technical supplement it published alongside the president's budget request.
"We must continue to be responsible stewards of taxpayer dollars. That means making strategic decisions — including scaling back or discontinuing ineffective efforts not aligned with our Moon and Mars exploration priorities" Petro wrote.
The final NASA budget for 2026 is still months away from being finalized. After Tuesday's vote, the two funding bills will move to the full Senate and House appropriations committees for a vote and further revisions. Only after that will every member of each chamber get a chance to vote on the matter. Congress has until September 30 to complete the appropriations process before 2025 funding runs out. President Trump could also decide to veto the bill if it doesn't align with his priorities.
Have a tip for Igor? You can reach him by email , on Bluesky or send a message to @Kodachrome.72 to chat confidentially on Signal.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


New York Post
25 minutes ago
- New York Post
American father-of-three who joined Russian army to escape ‘woke' US has been sent to the frontlines, wife says
A Texas father-of-three who moved his family to Russia and joined the military to escape 'wokeness' in the US has been sent to the frontlines of Moscow's meat grinder, his wife said. Derek Huffman, 46, claimed he was being tossed under the bus after being deployed to the frontlines in Ukraine despite assurances from the Russian military that he would be serving in a non-combat role, his wife DeAnna said in a now deleted YouTube page, according to the Telegraph. 'He feels like he's being thrown to the wolves right now, and he's kind of having to lean on faith, and that's what we're all doing,' she said of her husband's situation. 4 Texan Derek Huffman moved to Russia together with his family to escape 'wokeness' in the US. X / HuffmanTime 4 Huffman went on to join the Russian military, where he was allegedly promised a non-combat role, only for him to be deployed to the frontlines, his wife claims. YouTube / HuffmanTime The Huffmans had moved to Russia in March, with the father-of-three celebrating what he called an escape from the LGBTQ 'indoctrination' in America. He was one of two families who reportedly answered American blogger Tim Kirby's invitation to move to a village outside Moscow to be free of the 'liberal gender norm.' To secure an expedited citizenship process for his family and to earn the respect of his new countrymen, Huffman told Russian state media that he would gladly join the military. 'The point of this act for me is to earn a place here in Russia,' he told state media last month. 4 Huffman claimed he was happy to enlist in the army to expedite his citizenship process and earn the respect of his new countrymen. 'If I risk myself for our new country, no one will say that I am not a part of it. Unlike migrants in America who come there just like that, do not assimilate, and at the same time want free handouts,' he added. DeAnna, however, claims he was misled during the military recruitment process, where Russian officers allegedly promised him a role as a welder or war correspondent. Instead, Huffman, who has no prior military experience, underwent training in a language he did not understand and was shipped off to fight in the frontlines, where hundreds of Russian troops are killed every week. 4 His wife, DeAnna, said her husband has no prior military experience and received little training by the time he learned he would be deployed to fight Ukraine. YouTube / HuffmanTime 'Unfortunately, when you're taught in a different language, and you don't understand the language, how are you really getting taught?' DeAnna pointed out. 'You're not.' 'It seems as though he is getting one more week of training, closer to the front lines, and then they are going to put him on the front lines,' she added. The confused wife also claimed that even after a month of service, the family has yet to receive any of the wages promised to Huffman. Huffman was last seen on his family's social media accounts during a Father's Day message to his wife and kids in June, which showed him wearing camouflage and speaking to them directly. 'I miss you all more than you can imagine,' he said. 'I can't wait to see you, hopefully I get a vacation at some point and I get to go home and spend a couple of weeks with you. 'But man, you're on my mind 24/7 and just know that what I'm doing is important to me and important to our family. Just know I will do whatever it takes to be safe and to come home to you. Take care of each other,' he added.


New York Post
25 minutes ago
- New York Post
US Olympic and Paralympic Committee bans transgender athletes in compliance with Trump order
The U.S. Olympic and Paralympic Committee is falling in line with an executive order from President Donald Trump banning transgender women from women's sports. The committee quietly updated its eligibility rules Monday, adding a paragraph to its 27-page 'Athlete Safety Policy' posted to its website that includes language that implies it bars transgender women from competing in women's divisions. Trump signed the 'Keeping Men out of Women's Sports' executive order — also known as Executive Order 14201 — in February. Advertisement The LA2028 official Olympic flag at Los Angeles City Hall on September 23, 2024. Getty Images 'The USOPC will continue to collaborate with various stakeholders with oversight responsibilities, e.g., IOC, IPC, NGBs, to ensure that women have a fair and safe competition environment consistent with Executive Order 14201 and the Ted Stevens Olympic & Amateur Sports Act,' the added language in the document stated. It's not clearly stated how the policy will be enforced, and it is unclear whether any American Olympians will be banned from the upcoming 2028 Summer Olympics taking place in Los Angeles. Advertisement A USOPC spokesperson told the New York Times that the committee had been having 'a series of respectful and constructive conversations with federal officials' following the president's executive order. The committee said it would work with national governing bodies to implement the new policy. 'As a federally chartered organization, we have an obligation to comply with federal expectations,' the USOPC statement read. President Donald Trump reacts after the FIFA Club World Cup 2025 Final match between Chelsea FC and Paris Saint-Germain. FIFA via Getty Images Advertisement No openly transgender woman has won an Olympic medal. The U.S. Olympic and Paralympic Committee's former policy based its rulings on 'real data and science-based evidence rather than ideology,' and that it would be 'making science-based decisions, sport by sport and discipline by discipline, within both the Olympic and Paralympic movements.' The International Olympic Committee has struggled to address the issue of transgender athletes in sports. USA Fencing updated its policy last week in response to criticism that it had been facing for allowing biological males to compete in the women's category. Part of the requirements to compete in a domestic women's competition include the language, 'Athletes who are of the female sex, provided all other entry criteria have been met.'


The Hill
25 minutes ago
- The Hill
The Memo: Trump fuels Epstein furor he wants to escape
President Trump and his allies are desperate to move past the Jeffrey Epstein controversy — but their own words and actions are having the opposite effect. Trump's decision to sue The Wall Street Journal over an Epstein-related story, his administration's choice to bar the Journal from the group of reporters who will cover the president's upcoming trip to Scotland, and Speaker Mike Johnson's (R-La.) eagerness to avoid a House vote on disclosure of Epstein material have all given fresh fuel to the story. The self-defeating aspect of this approach was typified by one social media post among the many that Trump has been issuing. On Tuesday afternoon, the president lamented that the achievements of the first six months of his second term were being underplayed because 'all the Fake News wants to talk about is the Jeffrey Epstein Hoax!' His post, of course, gave the media another reason to keep talking about it. The sense of creeping anxiety emanating from the White House over the Epstein matter is testament to the unusual discord it has caused within the Trump base. Trump's astonishing political comeback, from the nadir of the Capitol riot on Jan. 6, 2021, to winning the White House back last November, was enabled by the fierce loyalty of his 'Make America Great Again' (MAGA) supporters — and by a party that has grown ever-warier of crossing him. The Epstein matter is an unusual exception. Republican elected officials have proven uncommonly willing to break with the president — or at least create some discomfort for him. Even the Speaker has called for greater 'transparency' around Epstein, though he has more recently tried to close a perceived gap between himself and Trump. But Rep. Ralph Norman (R-S.C.) called on social media on Tuesday for a vote on disclosing the so-called Epstein files — exactly the thing Johnson has been moving to thwart. Norman said Republicans should 'vote on it before August recess and get it DONE!!' Rep. Tim Burchett (R-Tenn.) has also called for the material to be released, while Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) — who has been to the fore of the effort — is now in open defiance of Trump. Massie noted in an X post Tuesday that he had introduced 'the only binding congressional legislation' to get the Epstein material released, and 'in return, the attacks on me intensified.' Massie included in his message a screenshot of a Trump social media attack on him, in which the president called him 'the worst Republican Congressman' and 'A real loser!' Massie, in turn, used that attack to try to juice fundraising support from his supporters so he could 'stay in the ring.' The big picture, of course, is that the Speaker's reluctance to hold a vote is giving more ammunition to those who suspect Trump has something to hide. Massie told reporters Tuesday morning that Johnson seemed to want his party colleagues to 'just sort of stick your head in the sand' on the issue. It is a matter of public record that Trump and Epstein, the disgraced financier and sexual predator, were friendly acquaintances for years in the 1990s and early 2000s. Trump called Epstein a 'terrific guy' in a 2002 New York Magazine profile and also noted Epstein's fondness for women 'on the younger side.' It's also known the two later fell out, though the precise reason has never been definitively established. Some reports cite a competitive battle over real estate, others contend Trump cut contact with Epstein after the latter behaved inappropriately at the future president's Mar-a-Lago club. Trump's legal suit against The Wall Street Journal centers on the news organization's claim that a birthday message from Trump was included in an album to mark Epstein's 50th birthday in 2003. Trump insists the story, and alleged letter, are false. In terms of the politics of the overall matter, Trump is reaping what his allies sowed, at least in some regard. People around Trump stoked general suspicion of all the circumstances surrounding Epstein, who died — apparently by suicide — in 2019 while facing sex trafficking charges. The current storm was set off by the contrast between comments made by Attorney General Pam Bondi in February during a Fox News interview — where she said a list of Epstein's clients was 'sitting on my desk right now for review' — and an unsigned memo from the FBI and the Department of Justice earlier this month that contended 'no incriminating 'client list'' could be found. That set off real angst in the Trump base, with a number of MAGA-leaning commentators speaking out. The relatively meager polling that has been done in relation to Epstein underlines the political peril for the president. An Economist/YouGov poll released Tuesday found Americans disapproving of Trump's handling of the Epstein investigation by a huge margin. Fifty-six percent disapproved and just 22 percent approved. Significantly, exactly 1 in 4 Republicans disapproved of the president's actions, and an additional 30 percent declined to express an opinion. Just 45 percent of Republicans approved of how Trump had handled the matter. Those are unusually bad figures for Trump among Republicans. There is nothing very surprising about the overwhelming disapproval of the president's handling of the controversy among Democrats (only 7 percent approved), but it is also telling that independents came out against his actions by a massive 61 percent to 15 percent. For the moment, at least, Trump is stuck, and new developments are coming thick and fast. An announcement Tuesday from Bondi's social media account saying Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche would meet with Ghislaine Maxwell set off its own new round of speculation as to possible ulterior motives. In 2022, Maxwell was sentenced to 20 years for conspiring in Epstein's abuse. Trump has tried to turn the page repeatedly. So far, unusually, it hasn't worked.