Republicans unveil bill relocating NASA headquarters to Florida
Titled Consolidating Aerospace Programs Efficiently at Canaveral Act, referred to as the CAPE Canaveral Act, the legislation would relocate the NASA headquarters to Florida's Space Coast in Brevard County. The region houses the Kennedy Space Center and Cape Canaveral Space Force Station.
Scott's office called Florida 'a common sense choice' for the new headquarters.
'There's no better place for NASA's headquarters than Florida's Space Coast, where our nation's brightest minds innovate and help America reach for the stars,' Scott said in a statement.
'Moving to Florida will not only save Americans' tax dollars, it will enhance efficiency and streamline operations in this important industry with proximity to private-sector partners and a top-tier workforce ready to help America reach its space exploration goals,' he added.
Echoing the sentiment, Moody said Florida is the leader in space exploration and aerospace innovation, adding that 'establishing NASA's headquarters within the Space Coast will bridge the bureaucracy gap from the top down and bring stakeholders together.'
'Florida is the gateway to space and this commonsense proposal would save taxpayers money, encourage collaboration with private space companies, and tap into Florida's talented workforce to spur further innovation,' she added.
Scott and Moody are not the only lawmakers calling for the relocation of NASA's headquarters to their state with the building's lease set to expire in 2028.
On Tuesday, a group of Ohio lawmakers in Congress pushed for NASA headquarters to be moved from Washington, D.C., to Cleveland.
The lawmakers wrote a letter to Vice President Vance, who is from Ohio, and Jared Isaacman, President Trump's pick to lead NASA, that moving the space agency's HQ would serve as 'a significant opportunity to enhance effectiveness, efficiency, and fiscal responsibility.'
The letter was signed by Ohio GOP Reps. Max Miller, Troy Balderson, Mike Carey, Warren Davidson, Jim Jordan, Dave Joyce, Bob Latta, Michael Rulli, Dave Taylor and Mike Turner as well as Democratic Rep. Marcy Kaptur. Ohio Sens. Bernie Moreno (R) and Jon Husted (R) also signed the letter.
These efforts come as the Trump administration has sought to transform various federal agencies and departments, cutting spending and reducing the government workforce. The administration has also indicated it would like to sell some federal buildings.
In other office moves, Small Business Administration head Kelly Loeffler signaled she would move several offices out of 'sanctuary cities,' arguing that existing locations are bad for small business communities and not complying with federal immigration law.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
18 minutes ago
- The Hill
China hawks skeptical of Trump chip deal
Trump on Monday agreed to allow tech giants Nvidia and AMD to secure export licenses to sell their advanced artificial intelligence (AI) chips in China in exchange for a 15 percent cut of the profits. The White House said Tuesday that more such deals could be on the table. The unusual deal doesn't just raise legal questions. Experts say the U.S. should be wary of turning over American-made technology that could boost its adversary's AI capabilities, at a time when the two countries are fiercely competing for dominance. The security concerns appear to be a two-way street. China urged tech companies there to avoid any purchase of Nvidia's H20 chip, citing security issues. The move once again has Trump at odds with Congress's China hawks, who argue the administration is shortchanging America's national security interests to make a buck. Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi (Ill.), the top Democrat on the House Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party, in a statement said the most troubling part of the deal was a contradiction at the heart of the policy. 'The administration cannot simultaneously treat semiconductor exports as both a national security threat and a revenue opportunity,' he said. 'By putting a price on our security concerns, we signal to China and our allies that American national security principles are negotiable for the right fee.' The same panel's GOP chair, Rep. John Moolenaar (Mich.), said there are 'questions about the legal basis' for such a deal. 'Export controls are a frontline defense in protecting our national security, and we should not set a precedent that incentivizes the Government to grant licenses to sell China technology that will enhance its AI capabilities,' he said in a statement.
The Hill
18 minutes ago
- The Hill
NIH cancels mRNA vaccine contracts, citing lack of public trust
National Institutes of Health Director Jay Bhattacharya claims the federal government recently cancelled millions of dollars' worth of mRNA research contracts because the general public does not trust the technology. Bhattacharya explained the reason behind the abrupt contract cancellations, first, during an episode of Republican political strategist Steve Bannon's podcast 'War Room' last week and again in an opinion piece recently published in The Washington Post. In the article, Bhattacharya called the mRNA platform a 'promising technology' and acknowledged that it may lead to breakthroughs in treatment for diseases like cancer. 'But as a vaccine intended for broad public use, especially during a public health emergency, the platform has failed a crucial test: earning public trust,' he wrote. 'No matter how elegant the science, a platform that lacks credibility among the people it seeks to protect cannot fulfill its public health mission.' Bhattacharya's explanation for the administration's pivot away from mRNA technology differs from that of his boss, Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Kennedy announced last week the agency would wind down its mRNA vaccine development activities under the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA) and cancel $500 million worth of contracts related to the technology. He said that mRNA technologies funded during the pandemic failed to meet current scientific standards and that the federal government would shift its focus to whole-virus vaccines and novel platforms. Bhattacharya expressed concern in the article about mRNA vaccines' ability to direct human cells to produce spike proteins to trigger an immune response. He argues the scientific community does not have a clear understanding of where mRNA product stays in the body, for how long, and whether other proteins are created in the process. Scott Hensley, a microbiology professor at the University of Pennsylvania's Perelman School of Medicine, told STAT that these are also issues with vaccines that use live but weakened viruses like the measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine, which federal health agencies have deemed safe and effective. 'This is why we complete human clinical studies before vaccines are widely used in humans,' he told the outlet. 'The mRNA and live attenuated vaccine platforms have both proven to be safe and effective in clinical trials.' He blamed public distrust in mRNA on the Biden administration's COVID-19 vaccine mandates during the pandemic. Bhattacharya expressed concern in the article about mRNA vaccines' ability to direct human cells to produce spike proteins to trigger an immune response. He argues the scientific community does not have a clear understanding of where the mRNA product stays in the body, for how long, and whether other proteins are created in the process. 'Science isn't propaganda,' he wrote. 'It's humility. And when public health officials stopped communicating with humility, we lost much of the public, an absolute necessity for any vaccine platform.'
Miami Herald
18 minutes ago
- Miami Herald
Judge to rule within a week on whether to temporarily shutter Alligator Alcatraz
The fate of Alligator Alcatraz is now in the hands of a Miami federal judge who over the last four months sanctioned Florida's Republican attorney general and blocked police from enforcing a new state immigration law. U.S. District Judge Kathleen Williams said Wednesday following days of testimony about the environmental impacts of the Everglades immigration detention camp that she plans to rule no later than Aug. 21 on a request to temporarily shut it down. Were she to side with the plaintiffs, it would be a significant blow to the Trump and DeSantis administrations, which have touted the hastily constructed detention center as a successful new tool in the president's mass-deportation campaign. Williams, an Obama appointee, is presiding over a lawsuit filed by Friends of the Everglades, the Center for Biological Diversity, Earthjustice and the Miccosukee Tribe alleging the federal government and the state dodged federal environmental regulations. They say the DeSantis and Trump administrations ignored the National Environmental Policy Act, which requires environmental review for any 'major' federal action. Williams has already given the plaintiffs a small victory in the case. As part of unexpectedly long multiple-day proceedings, Williams last week placed a restraining order on construction at the site until Aug. 21. She said Wednesday that she would issue her ruling on the proposed temporary injunction halting Alligator Alcatraz operations within that timeframe. An injunction would hold until a verdict is reached in the case, unless a government appeal on the ruling is successful. State lawyers said during the hearing they plan to appeal immediately if Williams issues an injunction. In order for an injunction to go into place, the environmental groups and the Miccosukee Tribe have to prove there will be 'irreparable harm' done to the environment around the site, plus a high likelihood that they will win the case. They also have to prove that damages to the ecosystem will outweigh any harm done to the government if the facility is shut down. Lawyers from the Trump and DeSantis administrations have dismissed concerns about environmental damages. But they have also argued jurisdictional issues, saying NEPA doesn't apply to Alligator Alcatraz because it is state-run and state-funded. 'A local plan does not become a major federal action upon federal approval,' said state lawyer Jesse Panuccio, citing case law. The question of who runs the site — since immigration enforcement is a federal power — has hovered over the environmental lawsuit and puzzled immigration lawyers attempting to get access to their clients – the subject of another ongoing suit playing out in a courtroom across the hall from Williams' chamber. The government lawyers in both cases have argued that the state's various federal agreements affording law enforcement immigration-enforcement powers give the state the authority to manage the site — though the Florida Division of Emergency Management, tasked with running it, does not have such an agreement. The federal 287(g) program underpinning those agreements initiates a partnership, federal lawyers argued in the environmental case, but it doesn't cede state control of its own facilities to the federal government. The state had full control over planning and executing the facility, and as now it has full control over managing it, state lawyers added. Lawyers for the environmental advocacy groups and the Miccosukee have pointed out that 287(g) agreements authorize local and state law enforcement officers to operate 'under the color of federal authority,' with the supervision of the U.S. Attorney General and Immigration and Customs Enforcement approval. They argue that makes Alligator Alcatraz a federal facility. 'The buck has to stop with ICE,' said Paul Schwiep, a lawyer representing the environmental groups in the case. Williams also questioned federal and state lawyers about what level of harm it would do to close Alligator Alcatraz in particular. She agreed an additional immigration detention center relieves overcrowding at other facilities in Florida, but she pushed for answers on why a new facility had to be built in the midst of Big Cypress National Preserve, asking if the governments involved had considered any other options. The federal and state lawyers said the remoteness of the facility was a factor, but Williams pointed out that other detention centers were within the bounds of cities. 'Why there?' Williams asked.
