NASA’s summer of discontent may be coming to an end

NASA has had a difficult early summer, between a proposed budget that would eviscerate the space agency’s science programs and President Trump’s sudden withdrawal of billionaire private space traveler Jared Isaacman from the nomination to be administrator of NASA.

Even so, there are signs that NASA’s fortunes may be looking up.

The space agency has a new administrator — sort of. As Ars Technica reports, Trump has appointed Secretary of Transportation Sean Duffy as interim NASA administrator, pending the nomination and confirmation of a permanent space agency head.

Duffy is said to have a “colorful background” since he was a cast member in a reality show called “Real World Boston.” But his four terms as a member of Congress constitute more relevant experience.

The careers of Jim Bridenstine (R-Okla.), another former House member, and Bill Nelson (D-Fla.), a former senator, demonstrate that political experience can be an advantage when dealing with Congress, which funds and sets the direction of NASA.

Duffy may be spread a little thin, having to run the Department of Transportation as well as NASA. It is also unclear what kind of power he will have to affect policy.

Duffy could confine himself to trying to enact the White House’s agenda, which involves draconian cuts to NASA’s science programs and focuses on human space exploration of the moon and Mars under the Artemis program.

On the other hand, someone who has ties to Congress and who can get Trump on the phone could make a good start in forming a space policy that is acceptable to both the White House and Congress. Duffy as a bridge between two branches of government could be useful because Congress is in open revolt against the executive branch’s space agenda.

Senate appropriators are rejecting the cuts to NASA’s science programs and are developing a bill that more or less funds them. The bill also reflects ideas advanced in the Big, Beautiful Bill in that it funds the Space Launch System and the Orion spacecraft past Artemis III and the Lunar Gateway. The House appropriators are marking up a similar spending bill.

Sen. Jerry Moran (R-Kan.), the chair of the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science and Related Agencies that funds NASA, made the reason pretty clear as to why the appropriators are sticking to the original Artemis plan for now. 

“For NASA, the bill reflects an ambitious approach to space exploration, prioritizing the agency's flagship program Artemis, and rejecting premature terminations of systems like SLS and Orion before commercial replacements are ready,” he said.

When and how those commercial replacements would be ready is not clear. Much will depend on how private sector launch systems and spacecraft evolve.

The SpaceX Starship is one of those launch systems that might become the center of a commercial Earth to moon transportation system. Unfortunately, recent tests of the Starship have resulted in spectacular failures.

The Blue Origin Blue Moon is another vehicle that could become part of a commercial lunar transportation system. A smaller, cargo version of Blue Moon is slated to launch on a New Glenn rocket perhaps as early as 2025. The larger crewed version is likely years away from flying.

Progress on the Starship, Blue Moon and possibly other spacecraft will doubtless inform Congress’ attitude about going commercial to the moon in the future.

One possible fly in the ointment is Duffy’s somewhat fraught relationship with Elon Musk. While Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency did initiate hardware and software enhancements to the air traffic control system, Duffy clashed with Musk over an alleged attempt to fire air traffic controllers in the midst of a series of aircraft disasters.

The acrimony between the two men may be a feature rather than a bug so far as President Trump is concerned. Trump withdrew the nomination of Jared Isaacman as NASA administrator partly over alleged personal ties with his fellow billionaire.

Questions remain.

Can Duffy help to turn NASA, reeling from proposed budget cuts and a leadership vacuum, around? Can he make peace with Musk and continue the NASA-SpaceX partnership that has so profited both organizations?

Can Trump find a permanent NASA head in a timely fashion? Can the Senate confirm that nominee quickly? Can the White House and the Congress agree on a budget and a policy that makes sense for America’s space ambitions?

The answers to these questions should be forthcoming with all due speed.

Mark R. Whittington, who writes frequently about space policy, has published a political study of space exploration entitled “Why is It So Hard to Go Back to the Moon?” as well as “The Moon, Mars and Beyond” and, most recently, “Why is America Going Back to the Moon?” He blogs at Curmudgeons Corner.