Contributor: To dumbly go where no space budget has gone before
Reports that the White House may propose nearly a 50% cut to NASA's Science Mission Directorate are both mind-boggling and, if true, nothing short of disastrous. To make those cuts happen — a total of $3.6 billion — NASA would have to close the Goddard Space Flight Center in Maryland, and cancel the mission that will bring back samples of Mars, a mission to Venus and the Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope, which is nearly ready to launch.
Every space telescope besides the Hubble and the James Webb would be shut down. According to the American Astronomical Society, some cuts would include projects that help us understand the sun's effects on global communications, a potential national security threat.
Casey Dreier, the policy advocate for the Pasadena-based Planetary Society, says, 'This is an extinction-level event for the Earth- and space-science communities, upending decades of work and tens of billions in taxpayers' investment.'
Read more: Mars rocks are a science prize the U.S. can't afford to lose
In addition, NASA as a whole would see a 20% cut — just as we are moving forward with the Artemis program. Artemis is NASA's step-by-step 'Moon to Mars' human spaceflight campaign. Artemis II is set to launch sometime next year and will send four astronauts on a lunar fly-by, the first time humans have been in close proximity to another celestial body in more than 50 years. While it seems likely that Artemis will continue in some fashion, a 20% overall agency budget cut won't leave any part of NASA unaffected.
The president promised a 'golden age of America'; his nominee to head NASA promised a 'golden age of science and discovery.' This would be a return to the dark ages.
Taking a blowtorch to space science would also have little effect on the federal budget while setting back American leadership in space — and the inspiration it provides across political divides — by generations.
Read more: Earth 1, asteroids 0: The next generation of planetary defense takes shape at JPL
The Astronomical Society warns that our cutbacks will outsource talent 'to other countries that are increasing their investments in facilities and workforce development.' And, as Dreier points out, spacecraft would be 'left to tumble aimlessly in space' and billions wasted that have already been spent. 'Thousands of bright students across the country,' he wrote recently, 'would be denied careers in science and engineering absent the fellowships and research funds to support them.'
Here's the dollars-and-cents context. NASA's budget since the 1970s "hovers" between 1% and 0.4% of the federal discretionary spending, according to the Planetary Society's analysis, yet for every dollar spent, NASA generates $3 in the national economy. NASA's giveback was worth nearly $76 billion in economic impact in 2023, supporting more than 300,000 jobs. In California alone, NASA and its associated partners in industry and academia provide more than 66,000 jobs, more than $18 billion in economic activity and $1 billion in state tax revenue. NASA's bang-for-the-buck is astronomical, pun intended.
Cutting waste is one thing. Evisceration is another. When it comes to science — from public health to climate change — the current administration is doing the latter, not the former.
Read more: Saturn's moon looked like a snowy Utah landscape in my mind. The reality is just as compelling
Meanwhile, China continues its space ambitions, with plans for a human lunar campaign and its own 'sample return' mission to the Red Planet. For now, fortunately, the bipartisan support for NASA seems to be holding. Democrats and Republicans in Congress, led by the Planetary Science Caucus, have spoken out against this attack on NASA. And the Planetary Society has engaged thousands of passionate activists to fight this battle.
Humans yearn for connection to the universe — so we watch launches on social media, we follow the tracks of rovers on Mars and we marvel at creation in pictures transmitted from the James Webb Space Telescope. We borrow telescopes from the public library and look to the heavens.
Bending metal — the actual process of making rovers and spaceships and telescopes — drives economic activity. Fascinating results — the data from space science missions — fires the imagination.
We choose to go to space — sending humans and probes — and we pursue knowledge because curiosity is our evolutionary heritage. We explore other worlds to know them and, in doing so, we discover more about ourselves.
If you agree, let Congress know. That may be the only backstop against dumbly going where no budget has gone before.
Christopher Cokinos is a nature-and science writer whose most recent book is "Still as Bright: An Illuminating History of the Moon from Antiquity to Tomorrow."
If it's in the news right now, the L.A. Times' Opinion section covers it. Sign up for our weekly opinion newsletter.
This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.
Hashtags

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

USA Today
16 minutes ago
- USA Today
Starliner launched 1 year ago on failed mission. What's next for NASA, Boeing?
Starliner launched 1 year ago on failed mission. What's next for NASA, Boeing? While the Starliner's first flight didn't exactly go to plan, both NASA and Boeing still hope the spacecraft can one day fly again. Show Caption Hide Caption Starliner astronauts reflect on extended mission in space Astronauts Suni Williams and Butch Wilmore discussed their extended stay aboard the International Space Station. On June 5, 2024, the Starliner got off the ground from Florida with two experienced NASA astronauts aboard for what was to be a brief trip to the International Space Station. But issues with the spacecraft prompted NASA to undock it without its crew. Butch Wilmore and Suni Williams ultimately spent more than nine months and 280 days in orbit as part of NASA's contingency plan to get them back home. The first human spaceflight for Boeing's Starliner made headlines for all the wrong reasons. But one year after its launch, it appears neither Boeing nor NASA have given up the spacecraft. On June 5, 2024, the Starliner got off the ground from Florida with two experienced NASA astronauts aboard for what was to be a brief trip to the International Space Station. Days then stretched into months after mission engineers noticed that the vehicle had encountered a slew of mechanical issues during its orbital voyage. As a result, the Starliner's crew, Butch Wilmore and Suni Williams, spent more than nine months and 280 days in orbit as part of NASA's contingency plan to get them back home. While the flight test went far from according to plan, both NASA and Boeing have given signs that there's still hope for the Starliner to fly again – following a lot more development, no doubt. Here's what to know about the Starliner mission and what's next for Boeing and NASA. Boeing Starliner: On anniversary of Starliner's doomed launch, look back at the mission's biggest moments What is the Boeing Starliner? Why NASA wants to certify vehicle Boeing is developing the Starliner spacecraft with the goal of it becoming a second operational vehicle for NASA to transport crews and cargo to the space station. The missions would be contracted under the U.S. space agency's commercial crew program, under which NASA pays private companies to conduct orbital spaceflights using their own commercial vehicles. SpaceX has already been making routine trips since 2020 to the space station under the program using its Dragon capsule. Standing nearly 27 feet tall and about 13 feet wide, Dragon capsules can carry up to seven astronauts into orbit, though most of SpaceX's Crew missions feature a contingent of four. The Crew missions launch on SpaceX's Falcon 9 rocket – one of the most active in the world – from NASA's Kennedy Space Center inFlorida. What happened to the Boeing Starliner, 'stuck' astronauts? As the two astronauts selected for the Starliner's maiden crewed flight test, Wilmore and Williams launched June 5, 2024 on a mission to test a vehicle intended to one day join the SpaceX Dragon in transporting NASA astronauts to orbit. The astronauts reached the International Space Station a day after launching, where they were expected to remain for about 10 days before returning home. But the mission ended in failure when a slew of technical issues with the spacecraft prompted NASA to determine that the Starliner was not able to safely transport its crew back to Earth. Instead, Wilmore and Williams had no choice but to watch the spacecraft that brought them to the station undock Sept. 6 without them to make an autonomous landing in New Mexico. Under a plan NASA announced in August 2024, a SpaceX Dragon that was already due to reach the space station on a mission of its own was selected as the vehicle to ferry Wilmore and Williams home. That mission launched as planned in late-September, but with one crucial change: Just two astronauts were on board the Dragon instead of four to leave two extra seats for Wilmore and Williams. That meant the astronauts who crewed the Starliner were due to remain at the station for a few extra months as Crew-9 spacefarers, NASA astronaut Nick Hague and Russian cosmonaut Aleksandr Gorbunov, completed their six-month mission. Then, once the Crew-10 replacement mission arrived March 15, the stage was set for the original Starliner crew members to finally return to Earth. The SpaceX Dragon vehicle carrying Wilmore, Williams, Hague and Gorbunov made a parachute-assisted water landing March 19 off the coast of Florida. What's next for Boeing, NASA in Starliner development? As of late March, NASA was moving ahead with plans to work with Boeing toward making Starliner operational. The aerospace company had plans to conduct more tests this summer at NASA's White Sands Test Facility in New Mexico while making modifications to the vehicle to prepare it for routine spaceflight, NASA officials have said. That includes fixing the thruster issues from the first crewed spaceflight and conducting more propulsion system testing. Teams have also been testing new methods for sealing the helium system to mitigate the risk of future leaks, NASA said in a March 27 blog post – its last public update about the Starliner spacecraft. The USA TODAY Network has reached out to NASA for more information on the status of Starliner. An independent watchdog report further determined in its 2024 report that other problems with Starliner also require modification before it can be certified. That includes a battery redesign plan and work to strengthen the landing airbag backing panel. "NASA is seeing the commitment from Boeing to adding the Starliner system to the nation's crew transportation base," Ken Bowersox, NASA's associate administrator for space operations, said in a March statement. But when Starliner could next fly – with or without a crew – remains to be determined. Eric Lagatta is the Space Connect reporter for the USA TODAY Network. Reach him at elagatta@


CNN
23 minutes ago
- CNN
NASA scientists describe ‘absolute sh*tshow' at agency as Trump budget seeks to dismantle top US climate lab
Federal agencies Space programs Climate changeFacebookTweetLink Follow NASA scientists are in a state of anxious limbo after the Trump administration proposed a budget that would eliminate one of the United States' top climate labs – the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies, or GISS – as a standalone entity. In its place, it would move some of the lab's functions into a broader environmental modeling effort across the agency. Career specialists are now working remotely, awaiting details and even more unsure about their future at the lab after they were kicked out of their longtime home in New York City last week. Closing the lab for good could jeopardize its value and the country's leadership role in global climate science, sources say. 'It's an absolute sh*tshow,' one GISS scientist said under condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak to the media. 'Morale at GISS has never been lower, and it feels for all of us that we are being abandoned by NASA leadership.' 'We are supposedly going to be integrated into this new virtual NASA modeling institute, but (we have) no idea what that will actually look like,' they said. NASA is defending its budget proposal, with a nod toward the lab's future. 'NASA's GISS has a significant place in the history of space science and its work is critical for the Earth Science Division, particularly as the division looks to the future of its modeling work and capabilities,' NASA spokesperson Cheryl Warner said in a statement. 'Fundamental contributions in research and applications from GISS directly impact daily life by showing the Earth system connections that impact the air we breathe, our health, the food we grow, and the cities we live in,' Warner said. GISS has a storied history in climate science on the global scale. James Hansen, a former director, first called national attention to human-caused global warming at a Senate hearing during the hot summer of 1988. The lab, founded in 1961, is still known worldwide for its computer modeling of the planet that enable scientists to make projections for how climate change may affect global temperatures, precipitation, extreme weather events and other variables. The about 125 scientists who work there are also known for tracking global temperatures, with GISS' records serving as one of the independent checks on other labs around the world monitoring global warming. The lab stands out, the scientist said, for its 'fundamental work contributing to our understanding of global warming, volcanic and aerosol forcing of climate, and advances in detection and attribution' of climate change impacts. 'All work that was curiosity-driven and enabled by the autonomy we had at GISS to pursue these questions,' they said, adding: 'Everyone is stressed because we have no clarity from leadership on even what the long-term plan is. (It) Really feels like we are just being left to die on the vine.' Another GISS scientist, who also spoke under the condition of anonymity, said the lab's independence has been key to its success, which can be seen in the abundance of published studies from researchers at the facility. The autonomy afforded to GISS over the years, given its distance from NASA headquarters in Washington, and its academic-like freedom helped its researchers take on important studies that might not be pursued in other circumstances, they said. And unlike high-level managers at NASA, GISS' leadership received high marks for their communications and advocacy of the center's work, according to three researchers. 'It is important for climate modeling to continue,' one of the GISS researchers said. 'They're the best tools that we have for the planet.' A technical NASA budget supplement released late last week committed to 'strengthening America's leadership in space exploration while exercising fiscal responsibility. NASA is adapting the way we work and invest to accomplish our mission,' Warner, the spokesperson, said. That Republicans' proposed NASA budget includes funding for climate modeling at all is notable, considering its cuts for space exploration and overall Earth science. Numerous space exploration missions and satellites would be abandoned under the budget, including some satellites already in space that are actively sending climate-related data back to Earth. The budget supplement makes GISS' fate both clear and hazy. It states Earth system modeling activities at four different NASA centers will be merged into one 'virtual institute.' This would incorporate 'core capabilities' of GISS 'as needed,' it adds. 'GISS as an independent entity will not continue,' the document says. This fate may be considerably better for NASA's climate scientists than the worst-case scenario seen at agencies like the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, where the budget for nearly its entire weather and climate research portfolio would be zeroed out and most of its research labs shuttered. Overall, the NASA budget would be a 24% cut compared to last year, with a 47% cut to agency science activities, according to The Planetary Society, a group that advances space science and innovation. Its analysis found the NASA funding level would be the smallest since 1961 when adjusted for inflation. The ultimate decisions on the future of climate modeling at NASA, as well as its space exploration activities, will fall to Congress as members consider the budget proposal, adding even more uncertainty to an already fraught period for GISS's staff.


CNN
28 minutes ago
- CNN
NASA scientists describe ‘absolute sh*tshow' at agency as Trump budget seeks to dismantle top US climate lab
Federal agencies Space programs Climate changeFacebookTweetLink Follow NASA scientists are in a state of anxious limbo after the Trump administration proposed a budget that would eliminate one of the United States' top climate labs – the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies, or GISS – as a standalone entity. In its place, it would move some of the lab's functions into a broader environmental modeling effort across the agency. Career specialists are now working remotely, awaiting details and even more unsure about their future at the lab after they were kicked out of their longtime home in New York City last week. Closing the lab for good could jeopardize its value and the country's leadership role in global climate science, sources say. 'It's an absolute sh*tshow,' one GISS scientist said under condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak to the media. 'Morale at GISS has never been lower, and it feels for all of us that we are being abandoned by NASA leadership.' 'We are supposedly going to be integrated into this new virtual NASA modeling institute, but (we have) no idea what that will actually look like,' they said. NASA is defending its budget proposal, with a nod toward the lab's future. 'NASA's GISS has a significant place in the history of space science and its work is critical for the Earth Science Division, particularly as the division looks to the future of its modeling work and capabilities,' NASA spokesperson Cheryl Warner said in a statement. 'Fundamental contributions in research and applications from GISS directly impact daily life by showing the Earth system connections that impact the air we breathe, our health, the food we grow, and the cities we live in,' Warner said. GISS has a storied history in climate science on the global scale. James Hansen, a former director, first called national attention to human-caused global warming at a Senate hearing during the hot summer of 1988. The lab, founded in 1961, is still known worldwide for its computer modeling of the planet that enable scientists to make projections for how climate change may affect global temperatures, precipitation, extreme weather events and other variables. The about 125 scientists who work there are also known for tracking global temperatures, with GISS' records serving as one of the independent checks on other labs around the world monitoring global warming. The lab stands out, the scientist said, for its 'fundamental work contributing to our understanding of global warming, volcanic and aerosol forcing of climate, and advances in detection and attribution' of climate change impacts. 'All work that was curiosity-driven and enabled by the autonomy we had at GISS to pursue these questions,' they said, adding: 'Everyone is stressed because we have no clarity from leadership on even what the long-term plan is. (It) Really feels like we are just being left to die on the vine.' Another GISS scientist, who also spoke under the condition of anonymity, said the lab's independence has been key to its success, which can be seen in the abundance of published studies from researchers at the facility. The autonomy afforded to GISS over the years, given its distance from NASA headquarters in Washington, and its academic-like freedom helped its researchers take on important studies that might not be pursued in other circumstances, they said. And unlike high-level managers at NASA, GISS' leadership received high marks for their communications and advocacy of the center's work, according to three researchers. 'It is important for climate modeling to continue,' one of the GISS researchers said. 'They're the best tools that we have for the planet.' A technical NASA budget supplement released late last week committed to 'strengthening America's leadership in space exploration while exercising fiscal responsibility. NASA is adapting the way we work and invest to accomplish our mission,' Warner, the spokesperson, said. That Republicans' proposed NASA budget includes funding for climate modeling at all is notable, considering its cuts for space exploration and overall Earth science. Numerous space exploration missions and satellites would be abandoned under the budget, including some satellites already in space that are actively sending climate-related data back to Earth. The budget supplement makes GISS' fate both clear and hazy. It states Earth system modeling activities at four different NASA centers will be merged into one 'virtual institute.' This would incorporate 'core capabilities' of GISS 'as needed,' it adds. 'GISS as an independent entity will not continue,' the document says. This fate may be considerably better for NASA's climate scientists than the worst-case scenario seen at agencies like the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, where the budget for nearly its entire weather and climate research portfolio would be zeroed out and most of its research labs shuttered. Overall, the NASA budget would be a 24% cut compared to last year, with a 47% cut to agency science activities, according to The Planetary Society, a group that advances space science and innovation. Its analysis found the NASA funding level would be the smallest since 1961 when adjusted for inflation. The ultimate decisions on the future of climate modeling at NASA, as well as its space exploration activities, will fall to Congress as members consider the budget proposal, adding even more uncertainty to an already fraught period for GISS's staff.