Since January 2025, when Donald Trump returned to the White House, his administration has enacted severe funding cuts across various federal agencies, including NASA. The proposed 2026 Budget plans to decrease NASA’s institutional funding by as much as 24.3%.
This translates to a financial drop from $24.8 billion (£18.4 billion) allocated by Congress in 2025, to $18.8 billion (£13.9 billion) in 2026.
The president’s proposals are not law until they pass through Congress, where they will be scrutinized, debated, and revised in the coming months.
Nonetheless, this situation focuses attention on some key priorities Trump has outlined during his two terms in office.
Focus on Human Spaceflight
During Trump’s first term from 2017 to 2021, NASA’s budget increased from $19.5 billion (£15.5 billion) to $23.3 billion (£18.5 billion), which constitutes about 0.48% of federal spending.
Trump has reinstated the National Space Council, shaping US space policies with the US Space Force consolidating national security assets in the latest military setup.
His administration emphasizes human spaceflight, launching NASA’s Artemis program aimed at returning humans to the moon by 2024.
Although this timeline appears overly ambitious, Artemis II is still scheduled for a crewed mission around the moon in 2026. If all goes well, Artemis III may land on the lunar surface a few years later.
Near the close of his first term, Trump formalized the National Space Policy, committing to lunar exploration and future missions to Mars. This policy streamlined regulatory frameworks, increasing accessibility for the private sector.
Support for human spaceflight and exploration carried on into his second term.
In April, when announcing the NASA Budget, the White House asserted its intention to return American astronauts to the moon “before China,” which has ambitious plans for a lunar base by the 2030s.
“The proposal includes investments to pursue lunar and Mars exploration simultaneously but prioritizes vital science and technology research,” stated NASA Administrator Janet Petro, reinforcing that the agency would “continue to progress towards achieving the impossible.”
read more:
Risk Projects Due to Budget Cuts
However, the budget cuts may hinder NASA’s ability to meet its goals, as it calls for “rationalizing the institutional workforce” while cutting many support services, including IT and maintenance.
The budget suggests cancelling the costly and delayed Space Launch System (SLS) rocket and the Orion Crew Capsule, both essential for long-range space missions like Artemis.
Instead, it proposes replacing them with “a more cost-effective commercial system” to facilitate subsequent missions.
According to the White House, SLS is operating at 140% over budget, costing $4 billion (£3.2 billion) per launch.
The SLS rocket completed an unmanned Artemis I mission in 2022, but as Trump’s budget advances, Artemis II will send astronauts Reid Wiseman, Victor Glover, Christina Koch, and Jeremy Hansen around the moon in 2026, with plans for lunar landings to follow.
Eliminating SLS and Orion, referred to as the “Legacy Human Exploration System” in Trump’s budget, could save $879 million (£698.5 million).
However, US lawmakers have expressed concerns about terminating the program, despite its notable expenses, as it has taken a decade to prepare for the flight, and cancellation could grant China a competitive advantage.
This sentiment was echoed by Texas Senator Ted Cruz: “It’s hard to think of more devastating mistakes,” he remarked during an April Senate hearing.
Another project earmarked for termination is the Lunar Gateway, a new space station intended to orbit the moon. Key hardware for this initiative has already been constructed in the US, Europe, Canada, and Japan.
While some missions might be salvaged, these cancellations risk alienating international partners that NASA has built relations with over decades.
Is There No More NASA Science?
The budget also threatens significant cuts to NASA’s Earth and Space Science Programs, with funding for the former at £1.16 billion (£921.7 million) and the latter at £2.655 billion (£2.1 billion).
“Are Mars and Venus habitable? How many Earth-like planets exist? We’re opting not to find out; such questions will remain unanswered,” the critique suggests.
The budget aims to terminate “multiple, affordable missions,” including long-term endeavors like the Mars Sample Return (MSR), which was deemed unsustainable.
This mission aims to uncover significant information about Mars’ past by analyzing rock and soil samples already collected by rovers currently exploring the planet.
Nonetheless, NASA acknowledged last year that the estimated cost of the MSR mission ballooned from $7 billion (£5.6 billion) to $11 billion (£8.7 billion), with its timeline pushed back from 2033 to 2040.
The proposed budget suggests that MSR goals may be achieved through crewed missions to Mars, aligning with Trump’s promise to “send American astronauts to plant the stars and stripes on Mars.”
However, China’s plans for a Mars sample return mission remain robust, with aspirations for execution in 2028, potentially prompting Congressional pushback against the MSR budget cancellation.
In Earth Sciences, the budget proposes cuts to various Earth monitoring satellites, many vital for tracking climate change.
The future of NASA’s Landsat Next is in question, which includes a trio of satellites set to launch in 2031 for monitoring Earth’s dynamic landscapes.
Meanwhile, several climate satellites and instruments currently operational, such as orbital carbon observatories and deep-sea climate stations, face closures even though they remain fully functional.
Another mission facing uncertainty is the Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope, scheduled for launch between 2026 and 2027, aimed at planetary exploration and investigating cosmic evolution.
This initiative is expected to be pivotal in understanding dark matter, dark energy, and answering fundamental questions about the universe.
Though Roman’s costs have escalated from an initial $2 billion (£1.6 billion) to over $3.2 billion (£2.5 billion), with 90% of the projected expenditure already incurred, the budget proposes reducing its development funding by $244 million (£133.9 million).
Ultimately, it remains unclear how the budget will be finalized as it awaits Congressional approval. Will these cuts devastate scientific progress, or usher in a new era of human exploration?
read more:
Source: www.sciencefocus.com
