One small step for man, one giant leap for mankind – July 20, 1969. The day that mankind quite literally flew to the Moon establishing NASA as the forefront of space exploration. 

Home to revolutionary technology such as the Hubble Space Telescope and the James Webb Space Telescope, NASA (The National Aeronautics and Space Administration) has detected some of the most distant galaxies, captured the first black hole, discovered carbon dioxide in far-distant worlds unlike our own, and taken the most breathtaking images of our solar system.

However, some of the greatest mysteries of our universe, such as life on other planets or the location of the Golden Record related to extraterrestrial life, may never be answered. Scientists believe such mysteries are in jeopardy because of Trump’s proposed “extinction-level cuts” to NASA spending.

The Trump administration revealed in July its massive plan to slash the space agency’s overall budget by 24 percent to $18.8 billion, the lowest number since 2015. Space and Earth missions would bear the brunt of these changes, relinquishing more than 53% of what was allocated last year. President Donald Trump’s request for the 2026 Fiscal Year includes no money for the Orbiting Carbon Observatories—despite its importance in precisely indicating where carbon dioxide is being emitted. Such cutting means key research that assists farmers, student researchers, and scientists for policy-making will cease.

Restoring NASA’s Science Mission Directorate to $9 billion would account for the needs of high-priority projects and cost increases in materials from recent inflation, where NASA has been directed to pursue a series of new missions that would support the United States’ educational industry, for Earth sciences, solar physics, planetary science, and astronomy.

The Trump Administration’s Agenda

NASA has stated that the missions were “beyond their prime mission” and are being terminated “to align with the President’s agenda and budget priorities”. Advocates are highlighting the future discoveries that will not be made, as they fund campaigns to persuade Washington lawmakers to “defy the President” and preserve or even expand NASA’s funding. 

“An extinction-level event is when…life that has been otherwise perfectly well-functioning, healthy ecosystems…are wiped out in large numbers. That’s functionally what this budget is,” said Casey Dreier, the Chief of Space Policy at the Planetary Society. Dreier has played an immense role in rallying Congress members to oppose the budget and preserve funding for future missions.

Furthermore, advocates express an immense loss to “un-crewed” science would be the $3.9 billion Nancy Grace Roman space telescope—created as a successor to the James Webb and Hubble telescopes—which produces stunning images and unexpected insights into the origins of the universe as well as the Big Bang. 

David Crisp, a retired NASA scientist who led the development of the Orbiting Carbon Observatories, said that they are much more accurate than any other systems globally [operating or planned] and a “national asset that should be saved”.

However, there may be a hidden incentive for FY2026—rooted in politics.

Crisp hopes that Congress will vote to preserve funding for current and future missions—funded through the fiscal year that ends on the 30th of September. A bill in the House would align with the President’s request and eliminate the missions, while a Senate version preserves them. For instance, Congressional Democrats warned NASA Administrator Sean Duffy last month that it’d be “illegal to terminate missions or impound funds already appropriated by Congress”. 

The Brain Drain

This poses a moral and legal dilemma for employees at NASA; science is not as important as it once was, as the [Trump] administration prioritises privately funded foundations and private schooling and redirects taxpayer money [to them].

“...and they’ve made a living of being innovative on a budget that was always limited,” says Ehud Behar, a high-energy astrophysicist at Technion, and a former NASA researcher.

Dreier said that there had been “productive” conversations with congressional Republicans and Democrats—pushing for an increase to NASA’s science budget—though Trump aims to grant extra funding for human missions to Mars. 

This poses a whole new set of hindrances for the United States’ scientific research and community. Missions can turn off mid-light, extended missions that are led in coalition with other countries, such as Japan and Russia, can be left to “tumble in space”—posing threats to international affairs.

The most worrying? 1,555 scientists, “...engineers, and others, were laid off due to loss of research money and technology investments”, says Behar. 

Is science dead?

What does that entail for the future of STEM education?

Crisp is attempting to put together a coalition of outside partners—including Japan and Europe—which could fund and operate instruments attached to the space station. NASA itself has said that outside proposals will be accepted.

NASA missions—and science as a whole—are critical to discovering the secrets of the universe, Earth, and improving the quality of various livelihoods. It encourages educational attainment and has a “direct bearing” on its leadership in technological innovation and the country’s “national security”. Cutting down on research funding isn’t economically shortsighted, but dangerous.

It’s in the essence of policymakers to protect and safeguard the brain-economy of the United States, especially since science is the building block of opportunities for educational institutions, multi-faceted social economies, and educating our youth.