Should NASA move its headquarters out of DC?

When you think of NASA buildings, you probably think of Kennedy Space Center in Florida, Johnson Space Center in Texas, or the Jet Propulsion Laboratory out in LA. You probably don’t think of its Washington, DC, headquarters. There have been two interesting proposals made for potentially new headquarters for the agency, neither of which is in DC. Is a move even possible?

In 2028, NASA’s lease on its current headquarters building will expire. Last November, the agency put out a request for new options to lease or purchase a new home for NASA. However, it is required to be within walking distance of a DC subway station. This means they don’t want to move too far.

NASA employs nearly 80,000 employees nationwide; about 2,500 work at its HQ in DC. Many of these employees focus on agency-wide issues, like the management of directorates, top-level administrators (as in the NASA Administrator, their deputy, and the associate administrator, who is the chief civil servant of the agency), and other non-location-based work like the NASA historical archives.

Having many of these roles located in D.C. makes sense, as many of the employees spend their time working with other government agencies, Congress, and the White House in keeping NASA funded and running.

However, most of the work NASA does takes place outside the DC area. The majority of its launches happen at Kennedy Space Center in Florida; its exploration and human space programs are run out of Johnson in Texas. The South is actually filled with centers that support human spaceflight, like Marshall, Stennis, and Michoud.

NASA’s non-rocket-focused centers like Glenn or Ames are strategically located in either politically important regions of the country or where the talent is. Ames is primarily the center that deals with innovative technology, so it’s located in Silicon Valley. Armstrong Flight Research Center, which has more to do with the A part of NASA than the S part, is located out near the Mojave Desert where it can have controlled airspace for its experimental aircraft.

While each center has its own director, the programs that take place in each center are controlled by its headquarters in DC.

Florida’s Governor, Ron DeSantis, believes that this should and could change. During a press event announcing a consortium of several Florida universities and KSC for a new research facility, DeSantis shared he believed NASA should move its headquarters to Florida since everything they do in space usually ends up launching from there.

“They have this massive building in Washington, D.C., and like nobody goes to it. So why not just shutter it and move everybody down here? I think they’re planning on spending like a half a billion to build a new building up in D.C. that no one will ever go to, either,” DeSantis said. “So hopefully, with the new administration coming in, they’ll see a great opportunity to just headquarter NASA here on the Space Coast of Florida.”

Now, obviously, the Governor of Florida would be in favor of a NASA HQ move to their state, as they would benefit from the added employment and revenue that could bring. However, while Florida is a massive launch hub, only a small fraction of what NASA does has to do with launch. Operating those missions usually happens elsewhere, building the spacecraft happens elsewhere, and anything to do with aeronautics or climate research takes place elsewhere.

There was another suggestion that was shared with X by the General Partner of Space VC, one of the leading venture capital firms helping fund the new wave of space startups.

“2025 Proposal: We move NASA HQ to Texas — joint HQ between Austin + Houston,” Jonathan Lacoste said on the platform. “The perfect balance between DC policymakers + Silicon Valley talent.”

Now this might make more sense, as both Austin and Houston have become hubs for new talent in space startups. Houston, especially, has become the place to be if you want to work with NASA’s human exploration programs. However, LA has also been a hub for aerospace talent, so a move there would have the same argument.

Does a move even make sense?

Almost every other major government agency has its headquarters located in DC, which makes sense as it is the beating heart of the US Government. Between congressional testimonies, working with budget teams, and advocating for its programs, DC is where you can get all of that done. Even if HQ moves out of DC, an office of employees would likely remain in the nation’s capital, and that would likely include top management.

Contrary to many people’s belief, the NASA Administrator’s job is not to manage the agency like a CEO or COO would manage a company. The Administrator’s job has always been to work with Congress and the White House to ensure the agency’s priorities are founded and understood by elected officials. They are a politician first, manager second. NASA’s Associate Administrator, and their directorate associate administrators, do the bulk of the managing.

Now all of these civil servants also have their home base in DC. Would they be better at their jobs if they were located closer to what they manage? Likely, as these NASA employees are less likely to be needed to appear in front of Congress as regularly.

Also, out of the 2,500 HQ employees, it is unknown how many of those are remote workers, as the agency still allows telework post-pandemic. So, it’s unclear if the 375,000 to 525,000 square feet of space NASA is looking for is overkill or not. Given that the current HQ is over 600,000 square feet, I’m sure there is some unused space.

While there is a new administration coming in a few weeks, it seems unlikely that they would move the HQ of a prominent government agency to an entirely different region of the United States. However, there could be ways to reorganize where certain managers are so they can better oversee their directorates.