Amidst the ongoing government shutdown in Washington, the scientific community is expressing concerns regarding the potential long-term consequences of proposed budget cuts to NASA and the National Science Foundation (NSF). The failure of Congress to approve a continuing resolution for fiscal year 2026 has resulted in the furlough of a significant portion of NASA employees and the suspension of non-essential operations. While the immediate impact of the shutdown is a pressing issue, many are focused on the potential ramifications of substantial budget reductions proposed for fiscal year 2026.
The previous administration's proposal included a nearly 25% decrease in NASA's overall budget, with almost a 50% reduction in its science programs. "This is a turning point. This is a key moment in the history of space exploration," stated Bill Nye, CEO of The Planetary Society, during a press conference. Nye and other advocates met with congressional representatives to voice their opposition to the proposed cuts, asserting that "Cuts to NASA science will not make the U.S. stronger."
While versions of the House and Senate appropriations bills aim to largely counteract the proposed reductions, discrepancies remain, particularly in science funding levels. Rep. Glenn Ivey, D-Md., expressed hope that the House would ultimately agree to the Senate's higher NASA science funding levels in the final bill. However, the completion of final appropriations for fiscal 2026 could take months, further complicated by the shutdown.
Astronomers are particularly concerned about funding instability, as it creates uncertainty for missions under development. Fiona Harrison, a Caltech astrophysics professor, emphasized that "The worst thing you can do to a mission that's building hardware or doing final design is give uncertainty in the budget." Despite NASA's current planning based on the House's proposed funding levels, the long-term outlook remains uncertain.
A key concern revolves around the future of NASA's probe-class missions. While NASA initially planned to select a new probe-class mission in 2026, the proposed budget cuts threaten to cancel the entire program. Harrison noted that NASA is still indicating that they will proceed with the selection, but the proposed budget creates uncertainty. Furthermore, the Goddard Space Flight Center has already experienced staff losses and faces hesitation from industry partners due to the potential program cancellation.
The proposed budget cuts also extend to the National Science Foundation, impacting ground-based astronomy. The administration's proposal would significantly reduce funding for the NSF's Mathematical and Physical Sciences Directorate, potentially leading to the dissolution of divisions and a shift in focus away from basic research in astronomy. Richard Green, astronomer emeritus at Steward Observatory, highlighted the Senate bill's more favorable approach to NSF astronomy programs.
Dick Obermann, a former staff member of the House Science Committee, acknowledged the uncertainty surrounding the outcome of the budget process for 2026. While a budget falling between a continuing resolution and the House and Senate bills is likely, long-term certainty remains elusive. Harrison echoed this sentiment, emphasizing the need for clarity regarding funding levels beyond fiscal year 2026 to ensure the stability of ongoing and future projects.