Summary
- Jared Isaacman (Administrator, NASA) said the $18.8 billion FY27 request plus prior funds provide resources to return astronauts to the Moon.
- Isaacman pledged to launch nuclear reactor SR-1 Freedom in 2028, increase SLS cadence, and build a nuclear-powered lunar base for Mars preparation.
- Madeleine Dean pressed Isaacman on omitting fifty science missions from budget documents and whether those omissions equal cancellations despite bipartisan congressional support.
- Grace Meng opposed the proposed 46% science cut and STEM elimination, while Andrew Clyde praised refocusing exploration and saving taxpayers billions.
- Isaacman promised the overdue FY26 operating plan next week as Congress weighs FY27 funding amid race with China for lunar south pole.
Morning digest
Get hearings like this in your inbox
Transcript
subcommittee will come to order without objection the chair is authorized to declare a recess at any time we want to welcome uh administrator isaacman to our subcommittee we're pleased to have him here today at a critical and exciting time for NASA. Administrator, I wanna first extend my congratulations to NASA for the success of the Artemis two mission. It was inspiring to see the crew uh complete their mission from launch to splashdown. We know this was no small feat. and involved everyone at NASA working uh toward a shared goal. I also wanna recognize Moorhead State University in my district. Moorhead was selected by NASA to support the tracking of Artemis two. I'm incredibly proud of Moorhead State's space science program. where you can get a degree in space science the unique opportunities that uh they offer to students in the hills of kentucky we're here today to uh review nasa's budget request for fiscal year twenty seven the request is eighteen point eight billion a five point six billion twenty three percent cut from the fiscal year uh that we're under at the moment in addition to the request NASA received roughly two billion dollars and the one big beautiful bill for fiscal twenty seven after the success and momentum NASA has built up over the last year It's disappointing to see that request. NASA has set out with ambitious goals under President Trump's leadership. America is in a space race with China, not so different from where we found ourselves during the Apollo uh marathon. We can learn a lot from history. The nation's commitment to Apollo. and the success of the program clearly demonstrates that this is a critical time for investment in NASA. We must build on the investments Congress has already made. Administrator, you have recently laid out an ambitious plan. For increasing the deep space launch cadence. Building a lunar base. Ramping up both. lunar and mars commercial missions and returning american astronauts to the moon the appropriations committee is supportive of these goals but it's only through a strong discretionary budget process in partnership with the committee that nasa can meet these objectives Let me now recognize the recognized member of the subcommittee, Mrs. Mink.
Thank you, Mister Chairman, and welcome, Administrator Isaacman. It's been two years and ten days since NASA last appeared before this subcommittee, and a lot has happened since then, most notably the safe launch and return of our Artemis two astronauts. And I, too, wanna extend a congratulations to you uh and to the entire NASA team. who many of whom have worked decades to make this happen um those four individuals the astronauts who went farther into space than any human ever did before uh did so on the shoulders of the tens of thousands of americans who made parts for the rocket or the orion capsule who used their own hands to build these systems and of course the countless scientists and support staff it is a success that every american can be proud of The success of Artemis two and the news that the Nancy grace roman telescope launch remains on schedule, is all the more remarkable because it comes after NASA was left adrift in twenty twenty five, with political leaders who actively harmed NASA's missions and set the agency back years by creating a massive brain drain. The trump administration's failure to steward the agency in twenty twenty five was further demonstrated, by deeply flawed and incoherent budget proposals and the lack of a fiscal year twenty five spend plan which the agency did not submit to the subcommittee until more than four months after fiscal year twenty five ended even now the trump administration continues to hold nasa back its fiscal year twenty six plan was due to this committee by march ninth and yet here we sit still waiting for it administrator isaacman i wanna be clear that no one up here holds you responsible for what happened before you were before you were confirmed um we know that the trump administration's office of management and budget has made this mess but you must clean it up unfortunately the fiscal year twenty seven budget reflects more chaos and failure by omb this budget proposal from the trump administration devalues education and it devalues the kinds of advanced research in aviation and earth science that will be critical to the american economy in the years and decades to come in short it's a surrender of nasa's position as a driver of the american economy outside the space coast our science missions depend on a strong relationship between nasa the private sector and university partners this request jeopardizes that successful scientific foundation by cancelling over missions and reducing or reformulating dozens more i can assure everyone watching this hearing that house democrats will once again lead the fight to make sure that these budget proposals never become law house democrats will not stand for a forty six percent cut to the science account including the cancellation of more than fifty missions some of which are vital to strengthening international partnerships and most of which drive innovation at universities all across america and we will absolutely not accept the elimination of nasa's office of stem education just as we did not allow this to happen in fiscal year twenty six these accounts are too important to the long-term future of our country and we won't let the trump white house abandon these advancements and even though it's beyond the scope of nasa i want to also highlight my opposition to the trump administration's proposal to gut the national science foundation and their indefensible decision to fire the entire national science board beyond the budget and its attack on science there are several additional policy areas where we would like some clarity from nasa because the budget request is insufficient in its details first nasa's conflicting and confusing perspective on commercial space space stations has raised concerns among providers potential customers and even capital markets. NASA's vision for space exploration after Artemis five is also unclear, even as we reach an inflection point for both current contractors and future potential providers. And finally, NASA's plans to convert Gateway into a base on the lunar surface raise important questions about the legally allowable uses of appropriated funds. I hope, Administrator, you can share some of your vision today so that we can consider your views as the fiscal year twenty seven appropriations process gets underway the bipartisan fiscal year twenty six nasa appropriations law was enacted in january with almost four hundred votes in the house because they rejected the trump budget cuts and instead maintained our investments in science and education while also investing heavily in space exploration mister chairman democrats are ready to work with you to reject the trump administration's budget proposal and ensure that the fiscal year twenty seven bill is another bipartisan legislative and policy success administrator i know that you want to be a partner with us and on that note i appreciate also your commitment to the goddard institute for space studies or gis in new york city and the requirement that nasa restore their physical space i look forward to your commitment to keep gis a key part of nasa's science directorate And I look forward to seeing these great civil servants back into the lab as quickly as possible. Uh, Mister Chairman, thank you and I yield back.
Thank you, Miss Minck. Mister Administrator, you lifted us up. In the last a few weeks. With the great success. Of all of us two. Congratulations from all of us. we now want to recognize our witness administrator isaac man for an opening statement without objection your written statement will be entered in the record the floor is yours
uh thank you mr uh chairman chairman rogers uh ranking member meng and members of the subcommittee i am honored to be in attendance before you today to provide an update on the national aeronautics and space administration and present the president's fiscal year twenty twenty seven budget request i'm grateful to president trump for the foresight to create the artemis program during his first term for the mandate established in the national space policy and for the resources that congress made available through the fy twenty twenty six appropriations and of course the working family tax cut act without that support we would not be in a position to undertake the national imperative to return to the moon to build a moon base and invest in the next giant leap capabilities like nuclear power and propulsion ignite the space economy, and launch great mission, additional great missions of science and discovery. i also wanna congratulate uh as well the entire nasa workforce, our contractors, our commercial and international partners, and of course the artemis two astronauts, reid victor, christina and jeremy, who brought the world together, they showed us the moon again, and showed humanity earth again. They did an outstanding job, and to the member of this committee and people all over the world, i just wanna say at nasa, This is just the beginning. I will state simply that under the President's budget request, NASA does have the resources to deliver world-changing outcomes. First, we will return NASA astronauts to the Moon. We have reworked the Artemis program into an achievable plan, by standardizing SLS, pulling in production, increasing launch cadence, and adding emission in twenty twenty seven to buy down risk. We are rebuilding NASA workforce core competencies, taking an active role, and ensuring accountability across the entire supply chain. We will deliver the outcomes the world has been patiently waiting for, and we will ensure the agency and industry is prepared to support repeatable, affordable missions to the moon for decades into the future. Second, we are returning the lunar surface to stay this time, to build a moon base. The FY twenty-six appropriations and the working family tax cut act already provide the resources to take a phased approach with dozens of missions, to learn and inform the next. We will experiment with mobility, power, surface and orbital comms, resource manufacturing and habitability. Eventually, the base will be nuclear powered and will help us master the skills necessary to someday, in the not too distant future, undertake a crewed mission to Mars. We will of course bring the world along with us, with orbital observation satellites, as the American people and really people all over the world can watch in real time on the moon base website. On that note, we are still investing in the next giant leap capabilities. After more than twenty billion dollars and decades of failed programs, NASA will finally, after more than a half century, launch a nuclear reactor in space and get America underway on nuclear power and propulsion. Now, I did not ask for one dollar more than what was already appropriated because we owe it to the pa- taxpayers to demonstrate the practical application of this nuclear capability. We will launch SR one freedom in twenty twenty eight, the first nuclear powered interplanetary spacecraft, to deliver the skyfall payload to mars and usher in a new nuclear air in space one that will power bases on the moon and mars and help us explore the outer solar system we also do everything we can to usher in a new space economy we have already expanded private astronaut missions to the space station and created more monetization opportunities for crew and cargo we are prioritizing high commercial potential science in low earth orbit and sending a strong demand signal for rovers landers modules and habitats. While we cannot force an orbital or lunar economy into existence, we will do everything we can to ignite one, so that by twenty thirty we can begin the transition from the international space station to one or more commercial space stations. The president's budget also supports the kind of exciting research and science mission that no other agency in the world can undertake. We are not accepting any gaps in earth science or space weather. We are flying X planes like X fifty nine, doing important research in aerospace materials. atc modernization and launching flagship missions like the nancy grace roman space telescope to help us unlock the secrets of the universe and the nuclear powered octocopter dragonfly to explore saturn's moon of titan and neo surveyor for planetary defense finally inspiration is inherent in everything we do at nasa and every dollar congress makes available to the agency the artemis two mission proved that as the world paused to take notice of those four brave astronauts i would say it's missions like this astronauts flying around the moon or landing on the moon walk uh x planes flying um flying again and imagery returned from our telescopes and rovers that truly inspire the next generation and through our internship and grant programs we help take them that next step so they too can grow up and contribute to the greatest adventure in human history i would refer to you in my written testimony for examples where nasa has not always been the best steward of taxpayer dollars every canceled program every cost overrun and every scheduled delay comes at the expense of great science and discovery i have no doubt there will come a day when nasa can and should do more with more and i hope i'm still in this position to advocate for it but with the national debt of thirty nine trillion and growing we owe it to the american people to show we can achieve extraordinary outcomes with budget requests that already exceed every civilian space agency in the world combined we can take this opportunity to look within ensure our resources are focused on the true needle-moving objectives outlined in the national space policy, clear out needless bureaucracy and obstacles that impede progress, and empower the best and brightest across NASA to deliver the headlines that only we are capable of making. If we do that, returning to the moon and building a moon base will seem pale in comparison to what we can achieve in the years ahead. Thank you.
Thank you, Administrator. We will now proceed under the five minute rule for questions. I'll begin by recognising myself. Again, let me uh offer thanks to you and the brave astronauts on a successful, spectacular success of the Artemis two mission. that that mission captivated the world in a way that it hasn't happened for many years what has NASA learned from that historic trip
well thank you for the question question mister chairman uh we got a lot of great data out of the orion spacecraft and the sls rocket itself uh worth pointing out this was absolutely a test mission uh no crew have ever flown on that rocket or in that spacecraft before in fact even on the uncrewed mission that was launched in november of twenty twenty two mmm artemis one we did not incorporate the eckless or the life support systems in the iranian spacecraft so we gathered an awful lot of data in terms of the habitability of the vehicle itself again the performance of sls and i'd say also sir we learned we can't fly that rocket every three and a half years uh when we first rolled the the uh artemis two vehicle out to the launch pad uh the first window of opportunity to launch was in february now i and i don't think anyone at nasa thought that we were actually gonna hit that additional window and that was correct we wound up having hydrogen leaks that were comparable to artemis one we did however think that we would hit the march window uh after a second successful wet dress and unfortunately then we encountered a helium flow issue in the upper stage that was also very comparable to what we learned on Artemis one, and that resulted us in uh having to put the vehicle back in the uh, vehicle, the rocket back in the vehicle assembly building, rework the issue, and we came out to the pad and launched successfully on April first. There is no question for a vehicle this complicated as SLS and Orion. You need muscle memory, sir. You need to launch this rocket, I I I think no less than every year uh, to ensure success.
On the heels of that historic Artemis two mission, share with us the the the goals of this budget request that include significant cuts below the fiscal twenty-six level.
Yes, sir. Uh, as I as I mentioned in my remarks, I believe our ability to achieve President Trump's national space policy of returning American astronauts to the surface of the moon, to pick up where Apollo seventeen left off, build an enduring presence to realize its scientific, economic, um potential uh is uh is adequately addressed between the fy twenty-six appropriations the significant investment that congress made through the uh working family tax cut act and the uh president's fy twenty-seven budget request this gives us the resources to accelerate sls production pull it forward to the left add emission in twenty twenty seven very apollo nine esk to buy down risk through the integrated test of the lander and the spacecraft in earth orbit and launch in uh in twenty twenty eight for our landing attempt protect for a second potential landing so maybe two at-bats in in twenty twenty eight to rebuild core competencies inside nasa so we can turn those rocket pads very quickly and of course to build the infrastructure on the moon itself so we can establish that uh you know that uh enduring presence sir
turning to uh nasa's operating plan which is required by law, to be submitted solely to the appropriations committee, for review and approval. When does NASA anticipate sending this to us?
Mr. Chairman, I uh more than acknowledge that this is uh not been delivered in a timely manner. You certainly have my commitment to ensure it is on schedule going forward. I think this is somewhat of the timing of when I was confirmed. uh when the national space policy came out making sure everything was properly aligned my understanding uh the nasa portion should be complete it's going through the final administration checks and i understand it should be delivered next week sir
we can't proceed until we get the plan so we hope that that can be forthcoming quickly
yes mr. chairman
we're in a new space race this time china given the national security imperatives it's uh crucial the american astronauts are the first to land on the moon how confident are you that american astronauts will be the first to return to the moon if the proposed budget levels should be enacted
mister chairman i am confident that we have an achievable plan now to return to the moon and build the enduring infrastructure uh under the president's budget request for for fy twenty seven uh i would say that we are incredibly advantaged in terms of the ability to construct a moon base very very quickly and now by adding an additional mission in twenty twenty seven and rebuilding core competencies so nasa can drive outcomes play an active role in ensuring our supply chain delivers what's necessary to achieve this mission versus perhaps a bit more passive in in the in in prior years, i do think we have the means now to ensure nasa returns to the moon before our arrival, and again establish that enduring presence.
i want to also ask about the new goals that you have set for nasa these goals include increasing launch cadence building a moon base and rebuilding the nasa workforce How are these investments reflected, uh, in the budget proposal?
It's a great question, Mr. Chairman. Again, I I I would point you to a combination of the the FY twenty-six appropriations and the ten billion dollar plus up from the working family tax uh credit act. Uh, I mean that is, that's a historic investment and targeted very specifically at exploration. So, uh, we would not be able to increase launch cadence. or construct the moon base if it weren't for those uh additional investments in uh in addition to the uh fy twenty seven budget request
thank you
thank you mr. chairman
this is me
uh administrator on february twenty first the science mission directorate received its fiscal year twenty six apportionment but then was directed by omb to pause work on ten science missions pending NASA's submission of a spending plan to OMB. Congress intentionally set the funding levels for five of these missions in law in the fiscal year twenty six CGS Appropriations Act. I understand that this spend plan was submitted to OMB and that it has been approved. Uh, can you tell us what day, when that spend plan was approved, and will you confirm that funds for each of these missions are currently available for obligation?
uh yes congresswoman uh so just to make sure i clarify when with spend planning talking referring to fy twenty five or twenty six
uh twenty six
yeah i'm sorry uh so to be clear every one of the programs that was in question uh has been apportioned and is being uh funded uh in line with the uh appropriations intent i my understanding when that was flagged and i i did some research internally it was kind of a standard process where uh omb had requested uh what those formulation plans look like in concert with the apportionment and that this was historic practice for for some time now but no funds have been withheld to any of those ten programs
ok i appreciate that it's this is was an additional bureaucratic roadblock that you know wasted time and resources for missions that are working towards very specific launch dates as you know It's further disheartening to see that each of these missions is again proposed to be canceled in this year's budget request. Despite obvious bipartisan support bipartisan support from this Congress, can you assure the subcommittee that there have been no delays in the mission development as a consequence of OMB's unnecessary roadblocks?
Yeah, and and Congresswoman, I I can't I I I can't comment on, you know, the validity of the roadblocks uh my understanding is it was normal practice for o and b to ask for what the plan the the project plans were uh with respect to those ten uh science missions i will tell you no funds have been withheld uh every every science initiative under uh the fy twenty six appropriations is still active right now
great yeah we these are laws agreed to in this bipartisan congress and it's omb should not be it should not be standard practice for omb to get in the way uh of an acted law um i do want to talk about in my home state of new york we have many excellent universities both public and private that are helping to keep new york and the us remain in the lead in technological advancement even while global competition is getting more intense nasa's science directorate is the key to successful university partnerships when nasa's funding an earth science mission built by an american company or by nasa itself and led by a principal investigator at for example nyu or cornell and generating data that can be used to help farmers anticipate long-term weather trends or help communities safeguard property from fires or floods that's a huge investment in america's economic and scientific leadership and i appreciate your prior public statements about the need for more flagship missions not only in earth science but other parts of the science directorate as well and i think you'll have the subcommittee's strong support here however it's important that the divisions within the directorate maintain a balanced portfolio of missions from both smaller and completed uh missions uh these mission classes allow researchers from across especially students and early career researchers to engage in mission formulation and execution, which is critical for training our next generation of NASA investigators. Um, can I ask how does the proposed budget ensure such a balanced portfolio is maintained?
Uh, thanks for the question, congresswoman, we we are, to be clear, not accepting any gaps across earth sciences. I've said many times we presently only inhabit one planet, we should try and know as much as we can about it. for all the reasons that you've described i think what we are uh what we are trying to do is acknowledge at some point industry around us is changing and moving very very quickly and just as you know ten fifteen years ago we did not have reusable rockets that could come back and land on ships which has been a game changer in terms of our ability to undertake more science or build an orbital economy you have multiple tech companies now printing off satellites uh at uh at great speed that give us the opportunity to do certain missions that are just naturally in terms of balance easier for an earth orbit for earth observation or space weather so we can undertake that science at lower cost and free up resources for what we know is very expensive like missions like nancy grace roman telescope or dragonfly or habitable worlds observatory so for sure we wanna be balanced across all the portfolios though some may naturally just be more affordable in the years ahead
yeah thank you and i'm sorry to go past my time uh you know i just wanna finish by uh forgive me if extra thirty seconds um you know nasa provided over three fifty million earth science research in fiscal year twenty five this budget request calls for only one hundred and sixty four million for heliophysics research the budget takes us from seventy million down to just thirty seven million so just as two examples we can work together on this i yield back i'm sorry
jess carter
uh thank you mr. chairman welcome
thank you sir
got an exciting future ahead of you and uh i for one looking forward forward to it uh given nasa's long experience with sterling technology and uh work underway at hyliion demonstrating much uh higher power than thought possible linear generators how does nasa plan to build on these initial engagements and translate them into a focus program that could meaningfully change how we think about lunar and other space based applications
thank you and and congressman just to clarify i i heard sterling power conversion is this with respect to nuclear power and propulsion in space
mmm
so uh a subject i'm extremely excited and sir um i and uh as a i do believe this is a natural direction for nasa to go in and absolutely imperative for maintaining a lunar base someday where will master the skills to someday send astronauts to mars but we're also gonna need nuclear power to help us make the propellant to bring them home safely not to mention just explore the outer solar system what i was disappointed to find is again over twenty billion dollars programs at nasa over decades that never left the lab the last time america put a nuclear reactor in space was nineteen sixty something so so what we're gonna do is actually get underway with nuclear power propulsion we're gonna cobble together a lot of hardware that's been sitting in the lab some day repurpose other hardware from other programs certainly work with industry whether it's uh sterling power conversion or brayton cycle we're gonna we're we're gonna work alongside industry to help bring this this uh capability to reality in space by twenty twenty eight prove that it works show the world and that's something i'd love to come back and talk on years ahead about how that program should be expanded because simply put once we get past jupiter we can no longer really rely on the sun if we wanna do some some really exquisite studies in the outer solar system and i think nuclear power and propulsion is gonna be a big part of that future sir
wow very interesting uh i represent fireflies it gets in my district and their ghost uh their blue ghost vision one performed the first fully successful commercial moon landing in march of twenty six and completed more than fourteen days of surface operations this is the longest commercial operation on the moon today administrator you recently announced support for targeting up to thirty robotic lunar landings starting next year this is an exciting development for both industry and nasa how would you block by the the robot lunar landers from companies like firefly have successfully landed on the moon uh to help drive the schedule and cost efficiencies
yes uh so congressman i'm very happy uh that you asked this question so what i found my uh say like my early days at nasa it's only been a little over four months uh you know we uh we tend to do a lot of things for a lot of lot of people at once and as a result uh when we're trying to undertake something very big and bold like we should do at nasa we've had a tendency to jump right to the dream state kinda think jump right to apollo eleven forget about the mercury and the gemini and all the apollo missions before we got there that that was a formula for success so when people talk about what does this moon base look like i just say it's not the glass dome with the the crop farm and the ferris wheel it's gonna be a lot of littles just like it was in the early days of our space program so uh companies like firefly and there's others intuitive machines as well um were building uh kind of bespoke landers and launching them infrequently and what we wanna do is help them template it and launch with frequency lots of landers and rovers just like i said testing power communication mobility navigation uh and and help us understand what does and doesn't work on the moon cause we haven't been there in a while and use that to inform the subsequent phases i have no doubt in the years ahead as we look to uh land on the moon robotic missions on a near monthly cadence companies like firefly and again intuitive machines and uh astrobotica and others they're gonna be extremely busy sir
uh one more question uh i read somewhere in this material that the uh chinese are trying to claim the south pole if i understand it that is a location we have seen that we think there could be water
yes sir
uh we can't let those people do that
no sir so uh there's no there's no question we are absolutely in a in a space race right now you think of the moon the surface area is about the size of africa where we wanna be and where the chinese wanna be that's like a little bigger than the size of washington d. c. it has water ice there which we're gonna wanna interact with and again master the skills to make propellant there on the moon when we're days away from home instead of when we we're nine months away on mars and we're gonna have to do the same thing so it's a perfect proving ground for us the the downside is we have a competitor that's a good thing because it will motivate us to put our resources where they need to be in focus we just don't wanna lose sir
and when we build our what we're building on the moon can we build it at that location
that's where we're gonna be sir you can count on it
right good deal
so and you
thank you mr. chairman
yes dean
thank you chairman rogers ranking member meng and thank you administrator isaacman for your testimony today uh i have to say i join everybody in this room uh regardless of anybody's politics uh i join you uh in congratulating uh nasa and their partners uh for the spirit lifting Artemis two mission. Uh it's something this this country beams about uh and it's so important that we continue it, so please take that back to all of your partners. Uh I wanna follow up a little bit on uh something that some of my colleagues you said to some of my colleagues in the house science committee last week. Uh when you were asked about a staff report detailing NASA's illegal implementation of the fy twenty six president's budget request uh nasa's decision to defund programs based on the president's budget request before congress uh passed its uh fy twenty six funding bill you responded that it is a long-standing norm at nasa to adjust prioritization of resources based on the lowest of the house senate or presidential budget request is that happening i'm building on what uh congresswoman meng ranking member said is that happening in response to the fy twenty seven budget
uh so uh congresswoman no that is not happening and to maybe expand upon what i said uh what uh what the uh the associate administrators for each mission director do in the in the face of a continuing resolution is start adjusting prioritization again based on the lowest of the marks aeronautics specifically adjusted prioritization based on the lowest of the house marks which i believe is approximately two hundred million less than where the appropriations came in at and they made the determination that this was not one of the highest priority uh development initiatives this is respect to the powertrain drive ma'am
so are you saying they have slowed or stopped work on some of those projects
not under fy uh twenty six or or we're doing we have to be very clear we're under fy twenty six appropriations we have not made any adjustments
no adjustment
based on the twenty seven uh president's budget request my understanding is last year under continuing resolution that was the long-standing practice to take the lowest of the marks and they in fact went based on the house mark on it
of course uh that shouldn't have been the practice because i'll remind you of what you know uh congress under article one section eight has the power of the purse and it is your role to implement uh the fy twenty six as approved by congress
mmm
we can confirm that understood right
you understood under as i am administrator we will always follow one man
Terrific. Uh, I wanted to hold up one of these posters just to continue to celebrate. Uh, turning to science, the core of NASA's mission. Just magnificent, uh, what came back to us. NASA science is providing the scientific foundation for Artemis. The landing site for Artemis four will be chosen using data from the Lunar Recognizant Orbiter. We understand the challenging, uh, radiation environment facing our astronauts. because of the heliophysics uh missions measured it. I was disappointed to see, just like last year, another massive cut to the science mission directorate. The president's budget request cuts three point four billion dollars, nearly fifty percent of its budget. More than fifty missions, as we've talked about, are simply omitted from budget documents sent to Congress. Yes or no? Are these omitted programs? excuse me cancelled
they are not cancelled no
why are they omitted
i think the belief and and i certainly agree with this position is that a lot of these missions that are in formulation right now have coverage from existing assets so we are not accepting gaps on that ma'am and that we can reformulate a better approach leveraging commercial industry for earth observation and space weather
well that's changing that's changing what actually has happened you're omitting uh as i said uh fifty missions in terms of this who made the decision to omit the fifty missions
i'm sorry but
somebody had to make a decision that they would have been pulled out
i and i i believe the the president's budget request reflects that these missions either in formulation or those that have been uh long past their original design life could be achieved so we're not forgoing the necessity of earth observation or space weather it's just that we can do it at lower cost and
the president decided that then OMB president or did uh nasa consult the advisory committees
uh this formulation process was uh i and again i i i came in very late in the in this process i would assume would follow standard practice which includes the uh you know the um discussions with the leadership from our various mission directorates
i'm new to this committee just this congress uh just as you are new to your position but it's my understanding that in the past missions
why i mean to be clear ma'am we haven't canceled anything yet every every mission is still is still active right now we are proposing that there are a lot of missions in formulation right now that could be done better faster and at lower cost to the taxpayers
yes but that hasn't been reviewed with us so i i think that is a mistake and i know my time is gonna run out or am i over i'm out
you're out
ok it went through i apologize for going over i didn't realize chairman thank you very much administrator
thank you
mr. clive
Thank you, Chairman, for this hearing today and and thank you, Administrator Isaacman, for your testimony before the committee. Uh, especially just two weeks after the crew of Artemis-two safely splashed down, uh, there's gonna be a chorus here of uh congratulations and and I'm not uh uh gonna miss that opportunity either so uh congratulations again uh for a tremendously successful mission around the moon. uh the first crewed flight beyond low earth orbit in more than fifty years uh i want to commend you and everyone at nasa for this resounding least successful mission one that inspired a new generation of scientists and engineers in united the entire country behind a common goal and that doesn't happen very often i want to thank president trump also for issuing executive order number one four three six nine titled ensuring american space superiority which sets America's space policy to extend the reach of human discovery, secure the nation's economic and security interests, unleash commercial development, and lay the foundation for a new space age. And I also want to commend you on the budget that you are presenting today. The FY twenty-seven NASA budget proposes a reduction of more than five point five billion dollars from FY twenty-six refocusing NASA's mission on space exploration and terminating the lower priority programs within the science mission directorate. Administrator Isaacman Administrator Isaacman, sorry. Can you tell me how this budget prioritizes NASA's most important missions, reduces redundancies, and ensures that critical programs remain on time and on budget, all while saving taxpayers an amazing more than five billion dollars? Thank you.
Um, thank you uh, thank you for the question, Congressman. I also thank all the members for the acknowledgement of Artemis too. I'm I'm I was very fortunate to be there at that time. Uh, that all belongs to the. workforce the contractors all the partners who have come together and uh it is just the beginning as i mentioned so i i do think it's important when we we talk about achieving uh the national space policy to look at it uh in in concert with the working family tax cut act that was a ten billion dollar historic investment in nasa not to mention the fy twenty six appropriations thank you very much uh along with the fy twenty seven budget request is giving us the resources to do the national imperative we're standardizing the SLS launch architecture, we're increasing cadence, we are taking an active role, I can't emphasize this enough, we will not sit on our hands and just wait for the vendors to deliver the hardware, that's not what they did in the nineteen sixties, it's not what we're doing now, we're embedding NASA subject matter experts across the supply chain to drive outcomes not excuses anymore, to get the hardware we need to launch this moon rocket with cadence. We are rebuilding our core competencies inside NASA, increase our expertise because I have to tell you throughout NASA's entire history, all the way through the shuttle sir we used to launch rockets every three and a half months on average not every three and a half years we need to get that muscle memory back and in parallel sir we have the resources to build the moon base to get uh infrastructure in the desired zone on the moon the south pole so we can get there start working with the water ice and master the skills some day for a mission to mars and we have the resources under fy twenty six appropriation and decades of struggling programs to get america underway on nuclear power propulsion in space. And, and as I mentioned, sir, too, we're gonna continue to work on igniting the orbital economy. We're gonna stimulate the lunar economy with lots of landers and rovers. And we're still launching extraordinary missions of science and discovery, flagship missions that no one else in the world is capable of undertaking.
Well, thank you. Uh, as a Navy supply officer, uh, I believe on, I believe in on track and on budget or under budget, if you can possibly do that. Um, so, great to hear that. You know, in March, twenty twenty four, sixty minutes, uh, detailed a significant question surrounding uh the Artemis program and its continued ballooning costs and schedule overruns. In this report NASA's Inspector General stated, and I quote, " significant reductions in cost and better planning". Now the current trajectory of the Artemis program is not sustainable. In response, NASA's Associate Administrator in Charge uh of the Artemis program said that NASA disagreed with the Inspector General's characterization of the current situation, and stated that NASA has taken a quote " affordable path" for the Artemis missions. So, my question to you is, do you agree with the Inspector General's characterization that the current Artemis cost trajectory is unsustainable, and if you do or if you don't, can you elaborate?
I think the Inspector General provides uh is an incredibly valuable tool at NASA, and I value the relationship with them because I think they're exposing uh parts of the agency that are mismanaged. And um, the Artemis program, uh, is absolutely correct. What we are setting out to achieve there, returning astronauts to the moon, and to use that as an opportunity to set up for, uh, for subsequent missions to Mars and beyond. Uh, but there, there certainly was mismanagement along the way. Uh, I mean, you, you've got a mobile launcher that we recently, we, we stopped on and we're standardizing to increase launch cadence, that was becoming a work of art from three hundred and some odd million to one point eight billion.
Ooh.
Uh. you know we were building a new upper stage that was entirely unproven instead of leveraging uh hardware that was already had flight heritage so the ingredients were were fine how we were putting them together was not making the right meal we are on a better track to that now sir and there is no question by standardizing it stop making it a work of art launch with cadence and i say especially sir putting the subject matter experts the brilliant minds at nasa into the supply chain and demanding outcomes uh is critical if we were to sit on our hands right now we would watch the chinese get to the moon before us we are taking a different approach right now which i have no doubt will bring down cost increase capabilities when we get back to the moon we can do so to stay sir
thank you great to see an aggressive approach and with that i yield back mr. chairman.
mister ivy
thank you mr. chairman uh mr. administrator welcome and uh i'm gonna join the chorus of congratulations with respect to Artemis. Uh, and I appreciate the fact that you recognized, um, the men and women at NASA and in the, some of the contractors who've done the work there over the years that really brought it to fruition because it really was pretty, pretty extraordinary and a great moment for the United States.
Yes.
I also wanna commend you the Nancy Grace, uh, Roman telescope, uh, announcement, I guess it was a week and a half ago at NASA Goddard, which is in my district. We were all very excited about that too and look forward to the next steps there. Uh, I I do wanna say, and this is maybe a bit of a theme here. Um, there's a I I I I appreciate the vision and the energy you're bringing to NASA and and especially the the approach to try and find ways to reduce costs and move even faster with the mission I am concerned though about uh the PBR I I don't know that it actually gives you the resources you need to accomplish that you've got. And it's an extremely tall order and along the lines of what the chairman said, it's especially important given the national security implications, um, that are connected with what's happening with NASA and where we're gonna be going in the immediate future. And so I know uh, Miss Dean asked you questions about the statement at the uh, before the uh, SST committee and I appreciate your your explanation about it. Um, I I do wanna say that if there are issues with respect to working out um the arrangements here with the PBR um I think the PBR is way too low. And I'll say in the last Congress, I appreciate the fact, I'm new to the committee as well, but um you know, we reached some good agreements here on this committee, uh the subcommittee and the full committee overall. Think we moved a lot of uh bills, including this one in particular, the president signed it And so when we reach those agreements about what the commitments are gonna be, as far as resource to particular programs, I think it's important um the NASAs stay on track with the commitments that were arranged and agreed to here.
Mm-hmm.
And if you have concerns, I know there's sort of lot of history with administrator, administrations like yours uh reaching out to the four corners and discussing, moving money around potentially. Uh, I gotta say, and this isn't your fault, but a lot of things you might be hearing about this stem from last year and what OMB did with respect to some money, unilaterally, despite what the uh appropriations bills might have said one way or the other. So there's some sensitivity about that, I think. Uh, I I also wanna just ask about this, the rebuilding the NASA workforce issue. Um, and we had a chance to talk a little bit about this uh previously, but my concerns there, uh, just like science overall, there've been a lot of cuts to a lot of talent and expertise uh that the administration's made, NASA in particular, NASA Goddard especially in particular from my perspective. Uh we had um uh DRP's uh uh you know cut, I think we lost about twelve hundred employees at uh NASA Goddard alone, and then uh twenty three hundred all combined when you j- include contractors there too. But wanna make sure that um that's in line with the vision that you've got you've you've been laying out different approaches to how you might bring people back to nasa curious about how you think it might work under the pbr uh and as i'm saying right now you know we'd we're we if there's a need for additional resources and i think there will be um you know let us know how we can help with that but i i did wanna get your comments on that front
yes sir and now uh try and hit a a couple of things there just for for everyone's i'm i'm here uh i'm here for the mission and uh and i know i it it's gonna take uh alignment from all involved in order to undertake and achieve the near impossible that we set out to do at nasa and i will always follow law and i'm happy to make my cellphone available to every member of congress if that's helpful i don't believe in surprises and i'm happy to
so be be careful what you wish for there but
i so i i and i am happy to defend too if there is circumstances where i think resources are not being applied correctly and coming at the coming at the expense of the science that we all care about i'll be the first put up my hand and have that conversation there will be no mysteries about it because i i want you to know um now with respect sort of the workforce initiative you you think you characterized it correctly before uh i do want us to be able to uh uh solve for some of the inefficiencies at nasa we talk about science missions probably one of the the greatest scientific discoveries could be had in human history if we can retrieve samples from mars and that was a program that started at two billion went to four billion was on track to go over ten billion was cancelled actually by the prior administration i mention this because you'll find there's a history of programs that have gone over budget behind schedule and when those dollars are gone that comes at the expense of the science we all want and part of that is the workforce initiative sir so when i uh this was a surprise for me and i went around and talked to every center and i set up an inbox to get thousands of responses back from the workforce find that over seventy five percent of the nasa workforce is contractors uh these are not part time subject matter experts that help nasa and others they show up to work everyday sit behind a desk with badges that look the same and generally are being supplied by three or four contractors four point six billion a year and they're not doing it for free sir uh they're and they're doing it because they charge a premium their value prop is workforce flexibility and when i'm trying to figure out how to build rockets faster launch rockets faster with greater frequency do the engineering support for those rockets and then control them on orbit at mission control those should be core competencies at nasa so bringing them in house improves operational efficiency uh and it saves money sir so i can do more science missions so i can put more astronauts in space and then the other part of the workforce initiative is bringing in subject matter experts from industry uh nasa is not the only game in town we got companies that can land rockets on ships bring them in for term based appointments one two three years to grow the young talent inside uh nasa and vice versa provide opportunities for them to go to industry and learn as well.
And if I could just briefly, Mister Chairman, uh, to point to about young talent, two thousand internships that NASA offers every year, apparently you're bringing in about one percent,
Yes.
the top one percent. I'd hope you take a look at bringing in more potentially than that. And also, um, with respect to the number of internships, I, I think, uh, Maryland got one, gets one for the entire state. Thirty-five for Texas, forty-three for Alabama. Seventeen for Ohio, forty-nine for California. I hope you'll give us an additional look on that front. But thank you so much for what you're doing.
Yeah.
And I appreciate the uh, the energy that you brought and your availability.
Thank you, sir. And I will look into that one. That seems, seems low, sir.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. You're back.
Mr. Alford?
Thank you. Uh, thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh, thank you, Administrator, for being here. NASA's work continues, I think, really to inspire the nation. I remember sitting as a kid on my grandparents' sculpted carpet in front of a big Magnafox TV. They told me not to sit that close, but I wanted to reach out and touch Neil Armstrong as he was walking on the moon. NASA is inspiring a new generation of young people, explorers, innovators. I had the honor of standing right behind you as Artemis launched into space a couple of weeks ago. And um uh uh until you have actually been there, as you know, it's hard to describe that feeling. As we review the FY twenty-seven budget request, I'm particularly interested in how NASA plans to balance ambitious exploration goals with a need for disciplined program management, and physical responsibility for the US taxpayer. I do have a general question I wanna straight out with the Administrator because I represent a very rural district in Missouri, south of Kansas City, over the Lake of the Ozarks, twenty four beautiful counties, a lot of farmers. And when I go out and speak to folks, and yes, I still do town hall stops. They they wanna know why are we spending taxpayer money to go back to the moon and on to Mars? So I want my constituents to hear from you directly to help me answer that question. I I know the answer to that question, but can you tell the good folks of Missouri's fourth congressional district why we are doing this?
Yep. Thank you Congressman, I appreciate the question. It was great to be at the launch with you and for the memories you had as a child, I can tell you uh we're back in the business of sending rockets to the moon, and it's only a matter of time before you get to witness that again. And uh, I'm looking forward to seeing it myself and for my children to see it. Maybe that goes to part of the answer, sir. Uh, you know the nineteen sixties, we uh, we did the near impossible, I mean in a time we knew so little to send, kneel and buzz to the surface of the moon, and bring them back safely, uh, it sent a message to the world of what we are capable of doing as a nation. Um, and uh, and I think that we, I mean the, there's just the sheer amount of technology that we learned from that, uh, you know not to mention the inspiration i can't tell you how many engineers scientists rocket scientists astronauts pilots right now uh chose those career paths that are so important for our own national security because of moments just like that you know when the president gave his uh inspiring uh vision to return astronauts to the moon pick up where apollo seventeen left off he said don't go just back for the flags and footprints this time build a base stay this time and learn learn about its scientific potential its economic potential, we may very well have a lunar economy someday. Three D printing AI satellites from regolith, mining helium-three, that economic potential is not something we wanna find out the hard way by coming in second place. Not to mention, it is the technological proving ground for us to someday undertake an even more ambitious and inspiring mission uh to Mars. Um, I would say that for all that we stand to learn, everything from a scientific perspective, and of course, the inspiration it has for the next generation to grow up and take us uh farther, it is a price uh worth paying. Now, there is a difference. In the nineteen sixties, NASA was four and a half percent of the discretionary budget. We're a quarter percent now, and you have some of the wealthiest individuals in the world that are contributing their resources well in excess of what's under contract today to give a capability that's vitally important uh for national security and I would say arguably for all of humankind so uh the price that we're paying is a lot less but what we stand to gain is so much more.
What do you see as the biggest challenge right now for the program?
That we have a very real competitor, sir. I uh uh in hindsight of course uh we thought we were in a space race in the nineteen sixties, and it turns out we had all the schedule margin in the world because no one's been back since Apollo seventeen. I can promise you, sir, and every member of this committee, that is not the case this time. Uh, it will come down to months. Uh, the Chinese program is very sophisticated, they're drawing on our playbook, uh, from the nineteen sixties for sure, and what you just saw, Artemis two pull off, you're gonna see the Chinese do in the not too distant future.
We have a new space race, if they win, what's at stake?
I would say uh, when in and using an uh example I gave before, July twentieth nineteen sixty nine, when you pull off the near impossible, it sends a message to the world of what else is America capable of doing, and it gives everybody a bit of pause, before they encroach, uh, an American interest across any of the most important technological domains. Well, I'll tell you the inverse holds true as well, sir. thirty five years of promising the american people we will return to the moon a hundred billion dollars spent in that endeavor to come up short it says something is broken and i think that shockwave will be felt around the world uh if we come up short
thank you sir i yield back
mr. bryler
i think we need new microphones mr. chairman but i appreciate you holding the hearing Uh, Mr. Administrator, thanks uh so much for being here. I joined with uh Representative Alford. I I I was um a young man watching those grainy images of Neil Armstrong in my uh mom and dad's uh living room, and feeling this extraordinary sense of pride and accomplishment. I I'm such a nerd, I probably could name the seven Mercury astronauts, that's how much uh I care about this. But um uh so look, congratulations to Artemis two, congratulations to NASA and all the folks who made this happen it is extraordinary moment uh in our history but i do wanna come back and i'll just say in general terms i think you've heard from a lot of the members about the science mission directorate and if you can do all these things and cut costs and do it in a more efficient way think we would like to know that but we are very very concerned about the potential impact of being delayed scaled back or cancelled so i don't wanna ask you again because you've been asked each way but just to reemphasize how important we think this is i do wanna though note in sort of just broad terms reading this morning about national science foundation's non-partisan national science board being eliminated or members being uh told that they are no longer needed um and you know also concerns about uh uh potential funding for the office of stem engagement um it it feels to me at a moment and you just talked about this a need for innovation bright minds to be engaged to be excited to be joining in this mission that in many ways the administration seems to want to undercut the this drive to having young people engage in science and whether it's stem or whether it's uh the um the other programs i mentioned um i'm really concerned about it so so help me feel less anxious about the administration's efforts to undermine science broadly uh because this does end up being an important part of what nasa is trying to do
uh uh congressman i appreciate the question and i just wanna say this administration absolutely values what we can accomplish in space uh as i mentioned in my opening remarks president trump created the artemis program during his first term created the space force the artemis accords that we now have sixty three nations around the world that have signed on for our like-minded views of what peaceful exploration of science and discovery should look like in the in across the last uh great frontier not to mention the national space policy that gives uh the mandate to return to the moon and build the base. What I would say, sir, eh with respect to inspiration, it's inherent in every dollar we receive from Congress. I mean, uh, you know, I've heard it across uh the diocese that Artemis two, I was sitting there with with my my my my child or my grandson, and and heard it in the previous committee as well. that causes people to pause and take notice and i guarantee you after artemis two you gonna have more children dressing up as astronauts for halloween sir
well i hope that's true i i absolutely but do you disagree that stem engagement is a core component then of that how how if we're not attracting folks to the sciences and engineering and math how do we end up expecting people to be scientists working on these programs in ten or fifteen years
sir i would just say it is inherent in everything we do at nasa the the inspiration for sure but everyone of the mission directorates has internship programs uh everyone of the mission directorates has grant dollars that go out so in within the president's budget request we can inspire the next generation through our exciting missions of science and discovery we can provide internships to give them pathways into nasa and we can get them hands-on with hardware through our various grant programs in fact the moon base alone uh with dozens of landings over the next three or four years i i've told this in in you know publicly many times we could raid the pantry at every nasa center for scientific instruments and there would be so much excess mass and volume available uh that we wouldn't know what to do with it we're gonna have kids in university right now building scientific instruments and in the next two years we'll be on the surface of the moon sir
ok i appreciate that uh uh we're gonna hold you all to it um uh with my last minute um the project ignition proposes pausing the lunar gateway a program it which was scheduled to receive about two point six billion under the one big beautiful bill although i know we don't refer to it that way anymore um but are you planning to reallocate the funding and the pause and can you talk a little bit about what you see uh the future of that
yes sir so uh there will still be uh you know orbital capabilities uh you know as a component of what that gateway program was meant to be you're gonna need orbital communication relay you're gonna need orbital observation but we believe the bulk of those resources sir should be putting infrastructure on the moon itself and not above it we don't want our astronauts looking down on the chinese when we could be on the surface ahead of them
but the idea of orbiting landers that would be be there on an ongoing basis that is now out of the project as i understand it
uh and it may very well be there in the future in fact i can see a lot of merit to it but i think the immediate priority is getting that infrastructure on the surface of the moon itself and not above it sir
OK. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
Mr. Strong.
Thank you, Chairman Rogers and Ranking Member Ming, uh, for holding this important hearing. I concur with the ranking member. Uh, it is a fact there is wide bipartisan support for NASA. I go a little further and there's a lot of support from the president of the United States and that's proven in where this place program is. Uh, it's good to see you again, Administrator Isaacman, and I thank you for being here today. Just seventeen days ago, the world watched as four astronauts returned to Earth, completing the first crewed deep space mission in more than fifty years. Every American should be proud of this incredible accomplishment. I have the honor of representing Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Alabama. You look at the second to none workforce at Marshall and the unmatched expertise in North Alabama and I proudly say the road to the golden age of space exploration, runs right through the rocket city. Since the first lunar mission, North Alabama's played a starring role powering our nation's uh space program and diligently working to make human space flight possible. We are the propulsion capital of the world. The legacy lives uh on today as we saw the Artemis two crew fly aboard America's rocket, the space launch system, the only human rated, flight tested and proven rocket for deep space human exploration. that has allowed Orion to travel more than six hundred and eighty-five thousand miles. Administrator Isaacman, in your testimony you emphasized the importance of focusing NASA's resources on mission outcomes. That includes uh an increase in cadence, which I totally agree with. I agree with that approach. We all share the goal of not just returning to the moon, but sustaining a long-term presence there. Mister Administrator,
Uh uh thank you Congressman, I also wanna say that uh the road that I
Uh.
to be here today also went through huntsville when i went to space camp at i i wanna say twelve or thirteen years old so i've an incredible appreciation space uh space and rocket center but also what uh the good work that's done at marshall space flight center uh you're absolutely right sir if we're gonna go through the trouble of building a moon base we better send our astronauts there with pretty great frequency so uh as of now we you know the plan is as it's funded through the working family tax uh cut act to use SLS through artemis five and i have no doubt components of that are gonna continue on beyond that we put out an horrified industry for no less than two different pathways to launch american astronauts to the moon every six months i have no doubt sls is gonna come in at one of them my guess is it's gonna come in at a lot lower cost cause we're gonna be able to alleviate those contractors from a lot of the the burdens that nasa has probably put on them and that's the feedback we've received from them so we're gonna wind up probably having sls as one of those vehicles at lower cost so we can launch it And I have no doubt we're gonna probably see a combination of another vehicle that's most likely gonna use Orion because to your point, sir, it's the only vehicle that's crew rated that can bring astronauts back from those kind of velocities coming back from the moon.
Thank you. What measures is NASA taking to ensure there's no gap in our deep space launch capability? And what does this strategy involve, keeping the SLS fully operational until a fully tested and proven alternative becomes available?
i i couldn't agree with you more that's exactly why we put out rfis now because we know uh well one we have a national space policy that says go to the moon and build a base so again if we're going to the moon and we're building a base we're gonna wanna send nasa astronauts there american astronauts there with great frequency on that we put an rfi out to industry and said tell us tell us what we don't know what are the options that are available so we can go every six months instead of every every three years which is the the cadence we've been uh we've been on up till now now i haven't seen the responses
Thank you. NASA in Congress has uh consistently emphasized that the Artemis mission's success depends on strong execution, a stable workforce, and maintaining uh the schedule. We've seen that model work in action. Artemis one and two were successful thanks to collaboration of small business, contractors, and civil servants who delivered uh on America's national security and civil space priorities, and they did it safely. Small businesses have played a key role supporting the expertise of civil servants to deliver on NASA's mission, for over fifty years and we must continue building those relationships and that ecosystem. As NASA explores new approaches to its workforce strategy, uh as you have suggested, such as bringing some contractor roles in house, the agency must not lose its expertise, innovation and flexibility that small businesses provide. Mister Administrator, how does NASA plan to balance its workforce strategy between civil servants and contractors, especially as it relates to efforts to bring contractor roles in house.
Uh, yes uh, yes sir. Um, and this is, it's a fantastic question, as I mentioned it was one of the biggest surprises I found when I, when I uh arrived at NASA. There is no question, sir, going back to the beginning of America's space program, NASA's civil servants have relied on a, a strong, very technical competent group of contractors, uh, vendors, even international partners to help us undertake and achieve the near impossible. Somehow though, over the years sir and i don't i i think this may go back a few uh you know few decades there was an impression of these artificial civil servant caps at certain centers and as a result we wound up outsourcing this is not necessarily small businesses sir but generally big public companies a lot of contractors at great expense so much so that now seventy five percent of the workforce about four point six billion a year is going to about three or four companies to supply a workforce to nasa indefinitely and the only thing american taxpayers are actually paying premium for which about one point five billion a year is workforce flexibility and here we think to beat the chinese we might need to bring in expertise on building rockets launching rockets and when those astronauts uh call back to and say houston that mission control that they're talking to is actually nasa employees and not contractors like it is today so we're just trying to right the balance the small businesses that provide subject matter expertise and consultants were that's not the focus of this sir but the big companies that are they're charging a lot to the taxpayers for perpetual staffing, we we we do wanna uh right that ship, sir.
Thank you, Mister Chairman. I yield back.
Mister Mervin, for you.
Thank you. Thank you, Chairman. Thank you, Ranking Member. Uh, Administrator, uh, Isaac Min, I wanna thank you very much for joining us today. I wanna echo the importance of the NASA STEM engagement program that my colleagues have made. Engaging young children after they have been inspired by the likes of the Arminis missions is important to ensuring that we have young adults who wanna go to go to schools like Purdue University, the cradle of astronauts on the onward uh to the moon, mars and beyond. In twenty twenty four, I was honored to announce that the challenger learning center of Northwest Indiana received nine hundred sixty three thousand through the appropriations process. I was proud to support the request, which will have a lasting impact on engagement in STEM and encouraging them to consider careers in science and space. Our children are the next generation of astronauts, scientists, mission specialists. who will help return humans to the moon, land a human on Mars, and achieve new heights currently unfathomable. In addition to Challenger Learning Center, Indiana Purdue University, Indiana's Purdue University faculty and laboratories play a major role in developing the science that goes into the NASA missions. The university's research in biology and lunar gravity will contribute to the sustainment of human life at the moon base. My first line of questioning for you today regards NASA's commercial lunar does nasa's twenty fiscal year twenty seven budget request provide sufficient resources to support the accelerated schedule for returning to the moon specifically the scientific exp scientific exploration space technology payload side of clips and then second does nasa's view clips does nasa's view clips and the plan shift to the medium and larger landers as a critical tool for maintaining us leadership in the race to establish permanent lunar presence.
thank you for the question congressman you know i i do talk a lot about america's ability to return to the moon and putting our astronauts on the surface before our great rival comes down to months uh not years with respect to building the moon base we have a huge edge here sir and it's thanks to programs like clips and ltv and the investments that have been made in prior years that give us the ability now to ramp up that supply chain to get more landers on the moon at a cadence nearly monthly starting in twenty twenty seven so uh we are absolutely relying on the the CLPS program i would just ask when you look at the investments being made into it uh to look beyond just the fy twenty seven budget request because uh to the prior uh question we plan to make good use of the resources that were going into the orbital outpost above the moon and putting that infrastructure on the moon itself so we're we're able to make significant investments in the CLPS program to build the moon base virtually the entirety of phase one leverages clips clips two point O and uh our LTV contracts are."
As the world marveled at the armadus. Two slingshot around the moon, NASA leadership released a budget that by and large cut program agency wide, and NASA's science taking the largest cuts. As NASA moves to the ignite its armadus program and accelerate returns to the moon, other programs that aren't as flashy are being canceled altogether. Small science missions not considered to be the flagships. just don't seem to be the priority of NASA in its budget. So to that end, can you explain the agency's cuts to NASA's budget at a strategic level?
Uh, I really appreciate the question, because uh, I would like to explain what our approach here is in this. Uh, again, first it's no gaps. So we're not giving up any earth observation or space weather capabilities whatsoever. We're looking at two categories specifically. And I would point out even under the president's budget request for sci- for our science mission directorate, it's greater than every other civil space agency science budget in the world combined and the approach is legacy missions that are decades beyond its original design life how can we still get after that data because the taxpayers invested a lot to have those capabilities on orbit do so in a consolidated efficient way to continue to get good science out of it as opposed to funding it exactly the same as it was twenty some odd years ago uh you know adjusted for inflation and then two we're formulating missions for you know that are meant to launch in the
so nasa's uh nancy grace roman space telescope slated to launch october twenty six uh will serve critical role in the characterization and threat assessment of near near earth objects contributing to national and international uh planetary defense objectives uh my question to you is can you articulate the importance of that for our you know what you can as uh how important that is in the space race
absolutely sir and i think just to clarify so nancy grace roman is called the uh the evolution of hubble space telescope it's it's it's absolutely extraordinary it's uh you know uh uh a hundred times the field of view of hubble thousand times the scan rate that's more pursuing the secrets of the universe you may referring to the neo surveyor satellite that's our planetary defense satellite we're looking to launch in twenty twenty eight and how important is it it's it's everything sir i mean we definitely don't want to go the way of the dinosaurs and uh it is it is basic basically our planetary defense strategy right now at least inside the the realm that uh nasa's oversight over relies heavily on uh terrestrial telescopes to pick up on things of interest. And what we want is to be able to point Neo Surveyor at it and give us a double-click alongside some of our other assets. It also naturally does its own scanning as well. Uh, but I think this is an area that of of great importance obviously to the nation and the world because you know what uh what doorbell cameras caught a couple weeks ago if I recall was in perhaps Illinois, that happens every single day. And fortunately they're small enough size uh uh, meteorites that they burn up in the atmosphere, but we know whether it's a cadence of every century or not, you're gonna have, you know, you're gonna have bigger objects that are gonna enter and we wanna get ahead of that as often as we possibly can.
Thank you.
Yes, sir.
Mister Klein.
Thank you, Mister Chairman. Thank you, Administrator. Uh, congratulations on the success behind the two mission first and foremost. Uh, it was a true demonstration behind the power of government and industry working together to achieve a common goal of returning to the moon, space exploration and human space flight. Uh, a key component to that success I believe is due to our thriving commercial industry, which we've cultivated by operating under the principles that government should rely on commercial sources with the exception, being when no private source is available. The work is quote inherently governmental, quote uh legally required or is necessary for national or homeland security interests. Uh, my office is hearing that NASA is issuing job opportunity announcements in-house for work that's already contracted privately as part of a NASA's new workforce directive. Uh, how can these functions be appropriately designated as inherently governmental when it's already being done privately and why does government need to duplicate this work and grow the federal workforce?
So, thank you for the the the question, Congressman. I I point out that what we're talking about here is not uh industry capabilities in terms of software or hardware i mean this is simply put these are staffing agencies and they are supplying a workforce to nasa that have worked there for years and will continue to work there indefinitely and as taxpayers we are paying a premium to have the flexibility right right up until we try and exercise it then they then they don't like us exercising that premiums sir uh to give you examples i think there are areas of core competency that are slowing us down Mission control right now, again, when astronauts say Houston over the radio, maybe one person in mission control is actually a NASA employee. Uh, the exploration ground systems, those that I need to depend on to build up the rocket and launch with cadence or to beat the Chinese back to the moon, it's entirely outsourced. And they talked to a different set of companies that we outsource, uh, the engineering work for that rocket to in another state, and don't share schematics, which was a problem we were trying to solve in the weeks leading up to the launch of this rocket. So, sir i'm not trying to take the the forty five thousand contractors or so and make them all civil servants but there are certain core competencies people made decisions in years past outsourced to temp agencies i think it's i think it's honestly it's wasteful uh use of taxpayer resources and it's coming at the expense of us being able to beat the chinese back to the moon
well when you say wasting taxpayer resources is nasa terminating contracts for convenience and allowing them to expire or running parallel federal and contractor contractor work streams and if so who bears the termination costs
so uh the way i would answer that sir is i am uh i am not picking the contracts that we are going after nor am i picking the the personnel the general guidance i said is uh to the uh to the bright minds at nasa in fact this is being led by the former stennis director from from mississippi and said what are the core competencies you need to ensure american leadership in space long after i'm gone and this administration change is over what do you need by center pilots at each the best example mission control and they're being extremely thoughtful sir about the timing of the contracts themselves which again inherently have flexibility built into them that's the whole reason we're paying i think about a billion to a billion and a half a year in premiums is for workforce flexibility so the contracts inherently do provide that um they just don't like us exercising it sir
so you don't agree that there are termination costs to uh those contracts to ending those contracts
uh and i i honestly couldn't tell you sir that we're actually terminating some of them we might just be exercising the flexibility rights that are within them to add or reduce the workforce and move them to civil servants sir
alright i understand you feel the mars sample return mission as formulated originally was rightly rightfully cancelled due to exorbitant costs and mismanagement uh however this committee provided a hundred and ten million dollars in taxpayer dollars in our final uh fy twenty six bill to go towards mars future missions that would buy down risk on some of the technology needed for a future MSR with the chinese planning to return their own samples by the early twenty thirties this may be another flashpoint in great power competition uh do you plan to take a look at the industry studies propose to nasa in twenty twenty four and reformulate a new mission to go and retrieve the martian samples
uh congressman i i think going and getting those samples would be absolutely uh extraordinary i do think it would contribute to the greatest discovery in human history and i am uh very disappointed chinese have a plan to go and do so on that that stated the previous program that again was cancelled under the other administration went from two billion to over ten billion so i i don't fault anyone uh when i'm my job here is to is absolutely the mission sir and uh i think in years past we tried to formulate these grand projects with various international partners and make a good press release out of it and the result was we actually never got after what we're intending to do and we lost a lot of money along the way if we are given the mandate to go get those samples and the resources do it we would formulate it the right way with industry partners.
Let me let me encourage you to utilize a commercial approach using firm price fix price contracting to prioritize cheaper faster and more efficient solutions to the complex mission. I yield back.
Sure.
Well, welcome to the subcommittee, the newest member of this August group, Mister Shreeve.
Thank you. Uh, Mister Chairman. uh administrator thank you for being with us uh i am the new the new member this is my second subcommittee hearing and uh when you're down dais you're often on clean up in terms of questions uh and so i don't wanna rehash material that my colleagues uh may have asked you i do wanna note that uh i represent it uh part of indiana as does uh my colleague from the chicagoland portion uh uh i'm a graduate of purdue university i uh uh studied agribusiness in grad school not uh rocket science uh but uh it's a an extraordinary university uh uh neil armstrong uh and uh about two dozen astronauts uh came out of purdue um uh my home state is also um uh deeply uh uh uh invested in uh some programs at nasa we've got l three harris we've got red wire uh continuing that legacy of advanced aerospace engineering Administrator, in this new era of competition, domestic manufacturing is gonna be critical to ensuring that we've got the capabilities necessary to compete uh with our adversaries, uh China principally. In your view, what investments are required to bolster the critical components of the space supply chain, advanced manufacturing, and ensure that states like my Indiana benefit from these public investments. Sure.
Uh, thank you very much for the question, Congressman. I would tell you right off the bat, we need valves. Uh, if i could wave a magic wand right now with respect to the supply chain and have more than one option, uh, to free up the bottlenecks when it comes to rocket production, lander production for uh, for our uncrewed, the clips landers we were talking about before, valves. Uh, you know, unfortunately in this respect, NASA's not always a great customer because we need exquisite valves uh to a certain spec and we might only need a handful of them. And it doesn't always make the best business case for some of these companies, so you're you're we're not always the highest priority and the valves we get often can be late, and fail to meet our qualification standards. So, we're actually taking this point uh sir and we're we're uh we're looking to use some of the cyber authority we have, try and stimulate small businesses to work on uh on some of the problems we have in the supply chain. if i were to go off top my head right now we need valves and we need hyper-gall thrusters uh in order to meet uh our our anticipated requirements for not just putting astronauts on the moon but also building the moon base
i appreciate that we've uh very much talked about getting to the moon and the moon is a leap frog to ultimately getting to mars but you know there's there are multiple missions uh that have and continue in low earth orbit up at the iss that we're funding today and that we would continue to fund in this this uh this next budget that we're wrestling with um can you speak to some of the the commercial missions going on and what that will continue in the in the next budget year on the iss and what their their uses will be on the moon uh in the end use cases that nasa needs toward these commercial development for the next few years
yes sir uh i have a great example for you which is uh the actual space suits our astronauts will wear when they're walking on the moon so we can do a lot of testing here on earth uh we can put our astronauts in the suits pressurized in a vacuum chamber to learn about the integrity of the suit but if we wanna know how they perform you know in reduced gravity one of the best places we can do is put them in space in it so we intend by the end of twenty twenty seven to get uh at least two or let me just say at least one will take uh of the spacesuits that we intend to put our astronauts into the moon to the international space station and it shows that our presence in lower earth orbit is a great proving ground again for some of the technology that's gonna be needed for the efforts that we uh we wanna undertake on the moon itself
i appreciate that it's very helpful um administrator i was very much looking forward to going down for the launch i was signed up on the first one and it was uh scrubbed i was signed up on the second one it was scrubbed i was speaking at a lincoln day dinner on uh on the first of april and so i missed that one uh but but it speaks to the the abundance of caution with which the program operates. And as as as we compete with China, much as we did uh with the Russians the last time around, it just seems to me, and I I don't know if you'll agree or not, but it seems to me that we will always be challenged to compete uh with an adversary that may not take the same abundance of caution and approach in protecting uh our astronauts and the human life that that that puts ourselves at peril uh as we undertake these missions and if if if you agree with that that observation that presence uh that that premise
yeah uh so congressman i uh i agree that i would generally agree that nasa has room to recalibrate our risk posture uh that does not mean you take uh in any way needless risk with the lives of our astronauts which would be entirely unacceptable uh but there is certainly approaches that we can take and i think many in the community would agree uh you know to um you know that need that that probably need to be done what i would uh say with respect to the artemis schedule slips is a product of uh of of muscle memory last time we launched that rocket was november of twenty twenty two which spent multiple times uh you know going in and out of the assembly building which made sense because it was the first time it was ever gonna fly But if we wanna get into a position where we can increase astronaut safety, and make our objective of returning to the moon more achievable, you need to launch that rocket with cadence. It's why we're rebuilding our core competencies, accelerating the production line, uh, making good use of the resources in the Working Family Tax Cut Act, and achieve the President's uh National Space Imperative.
I appreciate that very much. Uh, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
Chairman yields. That concludes uh the first round of questions. Uh, I don't know the administrator's schedule or availability for a second round of questions. I sense from our members that there is a desire for uh another round. Is the administrator available for a short break?
Uh, Mister Chairman, I'm I'm always here for the tough questions anytime, sir. I'm uh, I'm on your time. Happy to stay.
Good, thank you. uh we will limit the time to three minutes uh and uh i will yield to myself administrator let me turn you to uh part of this three nasa recently announced changes to its architecture in order to test the human landing systems ability to talk with the Orion capsule. The budget request for uh the human landing system is roughly two point eight billion. Uh given this very large investment, how confident are you that Artemis three will remain on schedule and successfully complete the mission? How does your budget request reflect the changes and the Artemis uh architect architect, sure.
I appreciate the question, Mister Chairman, and I I'm also very grateful because you're you're absolutely correct. The, you know, the taxpayers are making a very big investment to both SpaceX and Blue Origin's human landing system capability uh I would also uh appreciate that both those companies are investing well in excess of that as well for a capability that is so important to NASA but honestly national security American competitiveness because it's that capability that allows us not just to get back to the moon, really build the moon base, sir, put lots of mash efficiently and affordably on the surface, not to mention every other application that comes from a rocket that you don't have to throw away. So we're we're very grateful for that. I would say I've received responses from both uh vendors, both SpaceX and Blue Origin, to meet our needs for uh a late twenty twenty seven rendezvous docking and test the interoperability out of both landers in advance of a landing attempt in twenty, twenty eight.
For almost thirty years, the International Space Station has been a means of extending American diplomacy in space. The station is now nearing the end of its life cycle. Could you uh speak to NASA's plans to ensure that there is no gap an an american presence in low low earth orbit how does your budget proposal support that goal
yes sir well maybe i can uh separate just what's our plan and then speak to the budget uh portion of it so um i think maintaining a presence in low earth orbit is extremely important for the united states and our national partners there's only two space stations that are up there right now the international space station and the chinese one i think we'd like to make sure that that always remains balanced uh not just for the great collaboration with our international partners but again it's a it's a technological proving ground we're gonna test the suits we're gonna wear on the moon on the iss as well uh we are trying to be extremely thoughtful in our transition plan sir to avoid a gap as it stands right now the game plan is for nasa to transition to one or more commercial space stations where nasa will be one customer of many which makes sense from an affordability perspective again if you're traveling from point a to b you would much rather pay Yeah. So we put an RFI out to industry and we're getting the responses back, and I intend to meet with every one of them the the weeks ahead. And we've preserved the original pathway, and we've provided some alternatives. And I I wanna just ensure whichever one we go down has the highest chance success. Cuz to be honest, it's not on industry. NASA is not a good history in the last few decades of understanding the market size, or meeting budgets, or schedules well. And I don't think we wanna get this wrong and find out only the Chinese of a space station. With respect to the budget, sir, we are doing everything we can to stimulate an orbital economy, so that prophecy is fulfilled and we are one customer of many. That's why we added additional private astronaut missions to the space station. We might even buy seats on that, because it is directionally correct to get more NASA astronauts in space and work closer with uh uh commercial industry, we are giving industry the opportunity to monetize further, payload and commercial astronaut seats. So we can't force the economy into existence, but as I mentioned we'll do everything we can to ignite one, sir.
China's space station was launched in twenty one. Uh making it an attractive option. For countries looking to partner and conduct science. in space. Will you commit that NASA will not deorbit the International Space Station until an alternative is ready to launch?
Mister Chairman, I, we have a, we have an executive order right now to transition uh, the space station to commercial industry by twenty thirty. I wanna do everything I can with the resources and the expertise we have at NASA to insure that there is uh a commercial alternative available by that time. i don't wanna see a gap in low earth orbit sir
this is me
uh mister administrator i wanted to piggyback on what mister morelli had talked about earlier about the office of stem engagement it plays such a critical role as you know in building a future stem workforce uh new york just in fiscal year twenty twenty five the office invested two point five million and over three hundred thousand people participated in its programs um i know that the administration proposes eliminating this office and if you zero out the office uh how does a kid in new york public school get from watching the launch to actually working the mission without that financial bridge that nasa has provided for for decades and how does nasa plan to make up for the loss in potential future workforce talent
thank you very much for the the question congresswoman i i wanna emphasize and i understand because it's a it's a department and it's labeled it's naturally getting a lot of attention on this i just can't can't emphasize enough that the functions performed in that department also exist across our mission directorate so the ability to issue uh internships is across all of our mission directorates and grant making is also across all of our our mission directorates think the idea under the president's budget request is some of this is duplicative uh and doesn't acknowledge the the the inherent nature of every dollar given to us is it moves in the direction of stem
um i just wanna make sure that we as a country are building upon the energy and success of missions like artemis two we have to have a sustained effort to reach our kids and keep them excited about science and math from elementary school uh on so um would like to continue working with the committee uh on that and then lastly um back to what i talked about a little bit about the proposed budget cuts uh we can all agree that these partnerships are essential to ensuring that nasa maintains us space and technological leadership but concern that the cuts would force many of those partnerships to end ending ending vital cutting edge world changing research and permanently devastating our domestic research pipeline what specific mechanisms will you put in place to ensure that the vital intellectual capital in new york and across the country uh is in loss if these federal partnerships expire
uh and apologies ma'am uh can you which which programs
i'm sorry when we are talking about the the cuts to um how america's colleges and universities maybe um uh cut where nasa provided over three fifty million in earth science research in twenty five um but this budget requests for example costs for just one sixty four million and it's across different parts of the portfolio
and i and i guess i would just say to that ma'am that there is still uh hundreds of millions of dollars that will be going to universities across the nation uh as components of our grant program and i would say that it's still greater than every other uh commerce or civil space agency's budget whether it's on a science mission directorate level or grant making to
alright thank you i yield back
judge carver
thank you mister chairman uh i'm gonna go off a little bit i uh i was a teenager when sputnik went over probably a early teenager um all the neighbors in the neighborhood came to our backyard cause we had a vacant lot behind us so we could get a better view of where this thing was gonna come across so i had about thirty or forty people in in my backyard kids adults all watching this bunnico across now remember we were in the middle of the cold war at that time we've been living with the cold war we fought the korean war we had an enemy we worried about what was sad some of the world war two veterans were afraid that this was gonna be another world war three and some of those guys cried i hope my child doesn't have to go do that it was a sad part for the adults in many ways for the kids it was great when are we gonna do that look at that that's really cool and all they did was go beep beep beep beep people wondered do they have weapons on that thing are they gonna attack us this is the way people were thinking about it fear drove our first space race there's no doubt about it people were worried our president took the position that it was a was an a new area we can have a frontier to make it work and we did it but i just wanted to people talk about how do we get people together people will get together if you quit attacking each other that's my comment about this whole thing i think you've got great ideas utilizing great things that are current to us now which we didn't have before in the private industry and yet maintaining nasa's long range of it mission as a as a governmental issue i think it's a good plan but at the time the first one was we didn't know if we'd ever get anything in space so we've come a long way from when that first little beep beep beep went across and all the kids thought it was great and all the parents were scared i just wanna bring that up i'm old enough to remember that and it was a a big deal in my life so i wanted to share that with my colleagues you unite together and we all united together there was no parties screaming at each other we got together and we made it work if we do that this time the chinese don't have a chance yes sir that's my comment thank you
the german yield
yes
what a sputnik
what
shocked the world
sure
uh because no one expected russia a backward nation to have that kind of expertise it's i was working at a radio station in franklin north carolina i quit my job Made my way back to Kentucky. And enrolled in physics at the University of Kentucky. Motivated by the experience that I expected to take place in my life, which it did. Uh, so I enrolled in physics. But they wanted me to study math. I wanted to shoot rockets.
Maybe you.
anyway
mister chairman would do you mind if i make a comment on that one uh because i see this um student of history who has studied that time period uh quite a bit
i see
and uh would just say again we are absolutely in another space race right now we have a lot of distractions that go on our lives but i i take this responsibility uh very very seriously right now for the whole world to pause and take notice as american astronauts and one canadian space agency astronaut artemis two went around the world if you wanna talk about a Sputnik moment sir when when people pause to see the Chinese astronaut step foot off that lander on the moon they are going to take notice and i will tell you up until a few months ago the odds were in their favor for it to happen before america returns we have a far more achievable plan now because we're standardizing we're concentrating our resources back on the objective for a long time now we looked in every direction other than where we were and i think that's a phenomenal idea and i think it's a phenomenal approach and i think it's so so
yeah
a phenomenal idea and i think it's a phenomenal approach and i think we can all agree that so so here's my thought process here's my thought process it's a phenomenal idea and i think it's a phenomenal approach and i don't think it's a phenomenal idea
mmm
actions, anything that gets us off track right now and and that risk is real, and i think the shockwave will be felt around the world if we come up short.
thank you our chore in this environment our chore is oversight and budgeting but we're also your big cheerleader
thank you sir
and we want you to succeed um and i think that's bipartisan
yes sir
Mister Ivey.
Thank you, Mister Chairman, and um thank you, Administrator, for sticking around for a second round. Um, I did wanna follow up on uh with respect to the personnel aspect. Um, the human capital I think is um probably the greatest asset that NASA has and will continue to to be able to uh work from. And the NASA force uh concept and I I think it's a great idea, two year term. Um, and apparently there was so much interest that, you know, I guess you only gave them four days to apply and then overwhelmed the site. Is that is that correct?
I I I owe you updates on that, sir, but I understand there was a lot of interest, which is exactly what we wanted.
That's exactly what we wanted. Now, I did wanna ask you this, uh, the the two-year piece, this sort of similar to the question about the internships and you're only taking one percent cuz I think we're gonna need the talent pipeline to to be open. You can't take everybody and obviously it's gonna be an elite and selective opportunity, but um are you gonna be able to hire these folks long term? You get somebody there's there for two years and they're doing great work, will they be able to stay for a longer term? And the other question I had was uh the salaries issue. If they're coming from the private sector um and some of them may, some would be coming straight from you know, the the university system, I don't know, but is there gonna be some kind of comparability with respect to the salaries that they're gonna get in the private sector.
yeah so thank you for the question i i asked the same honestly i asked the same question about great that we were taking the top one percent that's awesome because that's a lot of applications from interns coming in could we take two percent and my understanding is the limiting factor there is actually having the mentors the experienced talent that can make time available to help grow them and that's that's where the nasa force program comes in nasa is not the only game in town and we certainly acknowledge the amazing contributions that are coming from industry and you have some of the best that are coming from comms and reusable rockets and eclos systems from industry heck the nuclear power industry uh you know working on micro reactors and they wanna serve their country they wanna come in and make a difference and help grow some of our talent and then go back to industry and i and i don't think they're they're economically motivated sir at least not from my conversations they wanna come help make a difference now i i did check on this point we do have the ability to convert them to full-time if if need be we also have the flexibility of one two and i believe up to three year uh appointments are available in this uh so so um so we have flexibility to bring them in help grow the talent and um and we can convert them over to full-time i i do think in terms of economics really comes down to it this leverages an any ex hiring authority goes back to the inception of nasa i think it allows us to essentially pay up to the same levels as the president though i don't think we i think we rarely exercise that
fair enough and then one other question if i might mr. chairman this goes to the continuity uh at goddard in particular um a lot of the people who were there uh over the past two years have been really um been sort of battered by some of the things that have been going on with respect to cuts that have been made by this administration and the previous administration to the federal government uh employees overall after Roman and Dragonfly, uh, I think a lot of people there are looking to try and figure out, is there gonna be something left for me to do here? Uh, and there are also people who are looking to, uh, join a, uh, an installation like Goddard and they're looking at it and saying, if I come to Goddard, will I, will there be some work for me to do there too? Because as you pointed out, many of them are there essentially for patriotic reasons. They wanna do public service. But it's a long-term commitment, or a longer-term commitment that they're looking for. And the training, uh, for them by more experienced, uh, scientists with the institutional knowledge, uh, is something of, of great interest to them. So, what's the, what's the plan for Goddard on that front?
Well, I, so, if I can hit on a, a couple subjects in, um, like I think some of our science centers, and this honestly does go back to the prior administration, uh, we have some of the best minds at NASA. and uh we actually denied for a period of time the prior administration to do reimbursable work for other government agencies where we could apply our expertise to be helpful and that's that's dollars that help supplement the budget and i point this out because hundreds uh of employees that were at uh jpl in years past actually were were laid off when we could have been leaning a little bit more into reimbursable work there to make good use of the expertise in between flagship missions which you know there will be naturally gaps at times so i will say we're trying to take measures again with the idea of absolutely making the most of every dollar available uh to nasa to insure continuity at these centers bridge gaps in between missions now what comes next it's it's habitable world's observatory this is what i'm i'm extremely excited about we've made investments to the fy twenty six appropriations and tech maturation but what does this mission do this mission tries to in least endeavors to answer the question are we alone which is like really at the heart of what we do at nasa now it'll take a long time to make capability. Uh the prior program, you know could be over ten billion dollars and not launch in the till the twenty forties. I'm challenging the team and I'm I'm very excited to work with our science mission directorate to rework it to do it in phases just like the moon base. What can we launch in twenty thirty? What can we launch in twenty thirty five that progressively gets us to that capability not build an empire out of something that will always be vulnerable in the years ahead but again in a logical almost iterative way across a couple missions get us closer to the capability to answer that important question.
Uh, thank you, sir, and thank you, Mister Chairman, for your indulgence, uh, in giving me the extra time.
Mister Strong.
Thank you, Mister Chairman. Uh, Administrator Isaacman, nuclear thermal propulsion is widely recognized as a critical component for future space exploration. Nuclear thermal propulsion, uh, has the potential to reduce travel times for deep space missions, increase payload capability, and provide mission flexibility. NASA has conducted over a hundred tests on nuclear thermal propulsion, uh, related systems, producing some of the most complete data on flight-like reactor systems in more than fifty years. Nuclear thermal propulsion is proven to be faster and can lift more. Additionally, Congress and the White House have supported NASA's pursuit of demonstrations of space nuclear systems. Uh, Administrator, uh, Isaacman How will nuclear thermal propulsion fit into future Artemis missions, especially given that it is a capability widely regarded as critical for future deep space missions?
Thank you, Congressman. I promise you, you will you will not find an administrator that is a a greater champion of nuclear power and propulsion than me. In fact, I hope, some because of the work we're doing right now over the next couple years, that there is an administrator sitting in front of you ten years from now and for money that's measured in billions towards nuclear power and propulsion, because it absolutely is the logical evolution of what we should be doing at NASA, because to your point, sir, it gets the astronauts to Mars faster, less time in that harsh radiation environment, it allows us to venture out even farther than Mars, uh, so it it's it's inevitable. What we're trying to do, sir, is uh is demonstrate nuclear power and propulsion in a practical way, as quickly as we can, to get it out of the lab, because we have, as taxpayers, spent over twenty billion dollars on these programs, we haven't launched a nuclear reactor in space since the nineteen sixties nuclear thermal propulsion is great the the downside is the exhaust of it is radioactive itself now in the nineteen sixties we just tested it out in the desert it's a different environment now the goal get underway with a seventy percent solution the most people don't know this our first nuclear powered submarine was designed to be a diesel boat it was a seventy percent solution but we proved it worked and the next thing you know we gave birth to the nuclear navy we wanna launch sr one freedom in twenty twenty eight show you it can be done and then I'd love to come back here and say, we need a whole lot more money for containment centers to test nuclear thermal propulsion, and build some really big nuclear powered spaceships, sir.
Uh, thank you and your uh, your team for being here today, it's an honor to be a part of this. The tough questions somehow come, but let me tell you something, we'll always be first. Mister Chairman, I thank you and um, for your service also, uh, we always get a budget, but that's nothing but the starting point, and without your commitment, Uh, we never could have reached uh where we are today and I thank you for your commitment. I yield back.
Thank you.
Ms. Deen?
Thank you, Chairman, thank you, Frankie Bember, and thank you again for staying on a little longer to talk with us. I have to say this was a a pretty inspiring budget hearing, which is a strange paradoxical phrase. Uh, but just hearing people reminisce, uh, I keep thinking back to I was a little girl, suburban Philadelphia, youngest of seven kids, and I remember my parents just huddling us all around the tv uh to watch july twentieth i guess it was july twentieth nineteen sixty nine i can almost feel the texture of the carpet in our living room as we just sat there astonished by what we were watching inspired so this last friday i wanted to tell you and make an invitation to you uh i had the chance to visit uh pennsylvania's only challenger learning center as you know inspired by the horrific forty years ago tragedy And inspired by the families who remained, they wanted to make sure we were pushing forward, uh, following that tragedy. Uh, these kids, fifth graders, it was so fun to be with them, and they were on the mission. Some were astronauts, some were communicators. Uh, some were engineers, building rovers and other robots. Uh, so my ask is, we'd love to have you come there. It is Montgomery County Community College. It's a beautiful, facility and we're very proud it's the only one in Pennsylvania. Uh, and I ask that also to say, I hope you'll rethink and reverse uh the decision to eliminate the Office of STEM Engagement. It is so critically important for all the reasons everybody just spoke about. We want these kids engaged. We were able to get uh some community project funding to this center, and what they're doing with that is making sure that kids uh in school districts that really don't have great resources, literally who don't have transportation money to bring the children to the center in my district, that they will have those resources. So it's really neat that this is going to reach many, many more children. So I ask you to really consider that and reverse um the elimination of the office of stem engagement. Uh, and the other question I wanted to ask you was um of some of the missions canceled. uh is uh the mission the roseland franklin rover uh led by our partners at the european space age space agency and i ask this with uh my other hat on i serve uh as well on the foreign affairs committee uh and i think it is so important that we partner with our european space agency partners uh for the rover launch twenty twenty eight uh to look for life on mars you've talked about it yourself but i don't see the roselyn franklin uh rover project anywhere in this fy twenty seven budget what's the status
thank you ma'am and if i can i'll hit a couple of those one uh i'll absolutely come and visit the challenger center i'm actually from pennsylvania
oh my god they're gonna be thrilled oh you are
so uh if i can uh the condition is if i can bring my daughters because uh i've been trying to get them down to uh space camp in huntsville and i've been unsuccessful up until now so maybe a local visit would be
you bring your daughters i'll bring our grandchildren
would be so um and i've just so you're aware i've actually met with the leadership of uh of the challenger center many times that's great were being very helpful at nasa we're providing them diagrams of our spacecraft so they can build simulators for their kids and personally i intend to be involved to help uh to help fund their endeavor as well um because i believe in it uh there's there's no question i also wanna clarify we haven't we haven't closed anything with our stem office and we haven't terminated any science missions this is part of our budget proposal request we have a strategy for every one of these uh like i said in formulation missions transitioning to commercial future all with the aim of getting after the science faster and with respect to your question on rosalind franklin uh you don't see in there because we paid for the launch vehicles part of fy twenty six appropriations that rover will be one of three nuclear powered missions that will launch uh into deep space in twenty twenty eight
so no no peril for that project
no peril
and we're continuing to partner with our european partners
we are uh we say it all the time we undertake the near impossible we never go alone
Well again, thanks uh to all your partners for allowing us to remember and to dream. Thanks.
Thanks ma'am.
I want to uh thank the administrator for uh all the information that you've shared with us. But more importantly I think is the enthusiasm that you have for this mission and that's uh worth its weight in gold thank you for being here today thank you for the work you're doing stay in touch with this committee and we'll be helpful as best we can so thank you sir for being here
thank you mr. chairman thank you rank member appreciate it
without objection members may have seven days to submit additional questions for the record subcommittee stands adjourned
Morning digest
Start every morning briefed on yesterday’s hearings
A free weekday email covering yesterday’s hearings and transcripts newly unlocked in the archive.
