It what normally doesn’t happen often, former Republican politicians have called out President Trump’s over-the-top NASA budget cuts as “reckless” and would cede space dominance to China. This is only the latest in a small but growing list of former and current party members that are going against their sitting president on this matter.
In an op-ed titled “NASA Needs Rational Reforms, Not Reckless Cuts,” former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich, former Representative Robert Walker, and former NASA senior adviser during the previous Trump administration, Charles Miller, discuss that NASA’s science budget is the wrong course of action.
Earlier in the month, co-chair of the Planetary Science Caucus, Rep. Don Bacon, publicly came out against the reporting of NASA Science’s large budget cuts.
“Certainly, the space agency needs to modernize and reform practices and personnel management – but not at the expense of world class science programs,” the three start out. The Republicans stated that throughout NASA’s existence, it has been the leader in space exploration and science, and that still reigns true. However, these cuts could put that in jeopardy.
“In 2018, President Donald J. Trump declared that ‘we must dominate space’ and ‘we must beat China in space.’ We are quite sure he did not mean ‘let China become the world leader in science’ or cut NASA’s science budget in half.”
China’s science and exploration programs have been ramping up in recent years. In LEO, their space station will outlive the ISS and the nation has continued human operations in recent years, having its astronauts spend six-month stays before a rotation mission is launched. On the Moon, China has already achieved a first by returning samples from the far side and expects to land humans by the end of the decade. And unlike NASA’s milestones, China tends to complete them on time or even early.
“We recommend bringing new science leadership into NASA,” the op-ed writes. “America needs NASA programs and policies that reflect new realities posed by world competitors – China in particular.”
Jared Isaacman, whom the three writers support, vows to bring a new level of urgency and efficiency to NASA if he’s confirmed. He has been publicly negative about how some decisions are made at the agency and has long been against the use of SLS for NASA’s deep space exploration.
“NASA’s science programs do amazing things, but they have huge cost management problems. Projects that once cost $250 million now consistently exceed $1 billion,” the op-ed continues. “NASA’s approaches to science program management and acquisition must be dramatically transformed. The space agency needs to cut committees, speed up reviews, address risk aversion, and reform procurement. Isaacman will do this as NASA Administrator.”
President Trump’s budget would instead just cut the Science budget of NASA nearly in half and would shut down many amazing programs that could be revolutionary in planetary science and exploration. However, NASA isn’t without fault. Mars Sample Return’s costs have ballooned to nearly $11 billion and would have an extremely small chance of even launching this decade.
Even when presented with commercial partners offering cheaper and faster alternatives, like Rocket Lab’s proposal, the agency drags its feet in making a decision. NASA even decided to let the Hubble telescope solely decay than risk a servicing mission, pitched and paid for by Isaacman himself.
“We are strong advocates for human spaceflight, but world class science at NASA is also critically important to humanity’s future in space. Both sides of NASA should be transformed, not mindlessly cut,” the op-ed concludes.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
Comments