These are the states gunning for NASA’s HQ

With NASA‘s DC headquarters’ lease up in 2028, the space agency is looking for a new home and suitors are already lining up. While it sounds crazy that you would take a government agency out of the political center of the US, some states think it’s possible.

Florida – Kennedy Space Center

The first to put its hat in the ring, Florida is the home of Kennedy Space Center, the agency’s premier spaceport, and of President Trump, earning it some favoritism points. Congressmen and Florida Governor Ron DeSantis have both expressed interest in moving NASA HQ to Brevard County, Florida, also known as “The Space Coast.”

This is truly the beating heart of spaceflight, especially launch operations. However, it doesn’t do much else. There is some research and ISS operations at the center, but unless you’re launching rockets or processing satellites, there’s not much reason to be here.

Florida Senator Ashley Moody introduced a bill that would formally move NASA HQ to Florida a year after enactment. However, it will have to move through the Senate’s Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee, which is chaired by Texas Senator Ted Cruz, who may also want NASA HQ in his state.

Advertisement - scroll for more content

Texas – Johnson Space Center

This month the Texas Congressional Delegation wrote a letter to President Trump calling out the need to move NASA HQ to Houston and Johnson Space Center. Like how Kennedy is the center for launches, Johnson is the beating heart of NASA’s exploration. Most notably, while Apollo and Space Shuttle missions were launched at Kennedy, once they lifted off control was handed off to Johnson.

This is where NASA’s flight control rooms are for the ISS, Artemis, and Commercial Crew missions. Johnson is also home to NASA’s astronaut corps, research on lunar samples brought back during Apollo, and the future home of NASA’s Crewed Mars missions. If NASA’s missions are narrowed down to just exploration, Johnson makes sense for it to be its home.

Even though I’m a Florida Launch fan, it’s hard to say anything negative about Texas as a potential home of NASA’s HQ. However, there is plenty that NASA does that isn’t at Johnson, like Earth science, astrophysics, and aeronautics. While less popular parts of NASA’s mission, those are more focused on the West Coast.

Ohio – Glenn Research Center

Another contender for NASA’s HQ is Ohio’s Glenn Research Center. A smaller and less talked-about center, it really is one of the meat and potatoes of NASA centers that, without it, not much will get done. Glenn is home to loads of spaceflight R&D and testing facilities so that when spacecraft launch to space, they know they’ll survive. There is a lot of engineering talent at the center that could be useful for the more technical side of NASA HQ’s job, like grants and contracts.

Also, with Glenn’s role in development and testing some of the more high-risk aspects of spaceflight, propulsion, and heat shields, its mission assurance team is key to much of NASA’s success.

A letter from Ohio Governor Mike DeWine outlines why he thinks Glenn would be a great fit for Ohio.

Should NASA HQ be moved at all?

While it’s easy to laugh at the idea of moving a major government agency’s headquarters outside of the nation’s capital, it might be worth asking if it’s possible. While Acting Administrator Janet Petro has already stated she believes a NASA DC office will always be in the books, especially for the Administrator, budget office, legislative affairs, and communications teams, you could think of a few departments that might gain in efficiency if moved to another NASA field center.

Mission Directorates could be a prime example, the head of each NASA Mission Directorate, reside in DC. You could easily break them up and send them to their relative field centers. Aeronautics could move to Armstrong, Space Operations and Exploration Systems could be at Johnson, Mission Support could move basically anywhere, Science would make sense to move to Goddard, and then Space Technology could go to Marshall, for example.

How meaningful are the savings or operational efficiency this will gain us? Unsure, but we know the decision will be pushed to when Jared Isaacman is confirmed as the next NASA Administrator.