Whitesides says budget proposal shows the administration does not value NASA science

WASHINGTON — A leading Democratic member of the House Science Committee says the proposed steep cuts in NASA’s fiscal year 2026 budget proposal show that the administration does not appreciate the value of science not just to the NASA but the country in general.

Speaking at a SpaceNews webinar June 10, Rep. George Whitesides (D-Calif.), vice ranking member of the House Science Committee, sharply criticized the fiscal year 2026 budget proposal for NASA, full details of which were released May 30.

The budget proposes a cut of nearly 25% for NASA’s overall budget, the largest single-year cut, as well as a nearly 50% cut to NASA science programs. That would, if implemented, result in dozens of missions being terminated.

Whitesides called the proposed cuts “catastrophic” and linked the NASA science cuts to broader reductions to science programs at other agencies, such as the National Institutes of Health and National Science Foundation.

“What underpins what we’re seeing is, I think, a full-scale assault on the scientific establishment,” he said. “It seems like there is not an understanding on the part of the administration of the importance of science and technology in our economy and our leadership in the world.”

He argued that the administration, in those science cuts, does not appear to appreciate the link between research and competitiveness. “I think that there may be a misunderstanding on the part of the administration of the underlying utility of these different scientific pursuits to the full-scale range of the American economy and our leadership,” he said.

He cited as one example the use of multispectral imagery in Earth science. “The Chinese are launching literally dozens of these types of instruments into space, and for us to give up our leadership that we have in multispectral imagery is not just purely an issue related to atmospheric science, but it handicaps, kneecaps our ability to find key minerals around the world, around our country, which are going to be crucial in the competition for the future economy of this century.”

The science cuts in the detailed budget proposal were not quite as bad as feared in April, when a leaked budget “passback” document to NASA from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) included cancellation of the Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope. The full budget does not cancel Roman, but does reduce its projected funding for 2026. “So there has been some movement,” he said, “but obviously not enough.”

He said he is talking with both fellow members of the House Science Committee, which authorizes NASA programs, as well as House appropriators, but said it was too soon to go into details about how those committees might respond to the budget proposal. “I think that there is a general view that these cuts would be catastrophic to NASA as proposed.,” he said, “and so people are thinking about what kind of response will be made to that proposal.”

Whitesides, a former chief executive of Virgin Galactic and, before that, a NASA chief of staff, said he’s working to educate fellow members of the science committee, as there was a high turnover in membership from the previous Congress. “My hope is that I can bring some new awareness to how these things relate to our economic and security, so that we can reduce the cuts.”

Artemis plans

The fiscal year 2026 budget proposal also calls for ending the Space Launch System and Orion after the Artemis 3 mission, replacing them with commercial capabilities. That has also faced opposition from industry groups. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) announced June 5 he would seek to add $10 billion in a pending budget reconciliation bill that would fund SLS and Orion through Artemis 5, among other moves.

Whitesides suggested it was premature to end SLS and Orion after Artemis 3. “I, personally, am in favor of continuing these things longer,” he said, noting that contractors are working on long-lead items for vehicles well beyond Artemis 3. “I think that work is important. We need to protect the folks who are doing that work.”

He is also looking for more information about the administration’s plan to shift to commercial replacements“What I think we don’t have right now is, in Congress, a full understanding of these architectures that are being proposed for both lunar and Martian exploration,” he said, adding that he wants to work “towards a fully sustainable long-term human space exploration program.”

He said he’s looking for bipartisan support for a space exploration approach that is both technically and fiscally sustainable.

“I think that the opportunity of this moment is to have bipartisan agreement around a long-term exploration plan. I think the idea of cutting NASA’s budget by a quarter is not consistent with any future scenario where we exercise long term American leadership in space,” he said.

Isaacman and workforce

Whitesides, like most of the space community, was stunned by the White House’s announcement May 31 that it was withdrawing the nomination of Jared Isaacman to be NASA administrator. The White House has yet to announcement a new nominee to lead the agency.

“I think it is, frankly, pretty bad for the agency, because what it means is that the folks over at OMB and the White House are still functionally in charge of NASA,” he said, blaming them for the proposed steep NASA budget cuts.

He called for a new person to be nominated and confirmed quickly as NASA administrator to give the agency permanent leadership who can work with both the White House and Congress. “It’s crucial that we get someone new as soon as possible.”

He acknowledged there are “no perfect candidates” to lead NASA and that he was open to people who don’t have a “traditional background” to run the agency. “That said, things that would be good to have would be someone who understands the full breadth of the agency’s mission and who values that full breadth.”

He added having someone with experience running large organizations is also important. “Sometimes we put people in place at the head of these departments who do not have experience running a large entity or enterprise,” he said. “This is a big organization. It’s a national treasure. NASA is important. We need somebody who has the skills to organizationally run that.”

The size of that organization, though, is jeopardized by potential layoffs. The budget proposal would reduce the agency’s civil servant workforce by about a third, to less than 12,000 people.

After accepting resignations of about 5% of the workforce through a deferred retirement program earlier this year, NASA announced June 9 it was starting another such effort. “All NASA civil servants received notification Monday the agency is offering a Deferred Resignation Program, Voluntary Early Retirement Authority, and/or Voluntary Separation Incentive Program,” NASA spokesperson Cheryl Warner said in a statement. “This affords employees the opportunity to depart while ensuring the agency remains fully capable to pursue its mission.”

Whitesides mentioned the new program in the webinar, saying that NASA risks losing some of its best employees. “The first people to take these retirement offers are often some of the best because they know they can get a job somewhere else,” he said, or are people who were already considering retirement.

He said the best approach for Congress is to emphasize support for the agency through both appropriations and authorization bills. “I think the more that people in Congress, members of Congress, talk about a positive future for the agency, and show that they are committed to a strong future for the agency, the better that will be,” he said. “We need to be the backstop in a time when it seems like the administration does not value a strong future for NASA.”