NASA Administrator Nominee Wants More Flagship Science Missions

Jared Isaacman, President Donald Trump’s pick to lead NASA, told senators it would be feasible to have “multiple flagship scientific missions at once” on top of space exploration efforts and expressed enthusiasm for basic science at the agency. Isaacman said Trump is “looking to usher in a golden age of science and discovery,” while committee Democrats pointed to recent layoffs, contract terminations, and proposed budget cuts at the agency.

At his nomination hearing Wednesday before the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, Isaacman introduced himself as “not a typical nominee” for the NASA administrator position.

“I’ve been relatively apolitical. I am not a scientist. I never worked at NASA,” he said. “I do not think these are weaknesses. In fact, I believe President Trump found them to be strengths.”

Isaacman is a billionaire tech CEO who has commanded two private orbital missions led by SpaceX. His nomination has been praised by various space industry stakeholders while drawing criticism from some conservative groups and activists due to his past donations to Democratic campaigns and the diversity initiatives of companies he has been involved with.

In his opening remarks, Isaacman said one of his primary objectives would be to make NASA “a force multiplier for science.” He told senators NASA should concentrate its resources on science with no obvious economic return and “undertake the near impossible” so that industry and academic institutions can build upon the agency’s discoveries.

He also pointed to NASA’s challenges, saying that most of its programs are over budget and behind schedule. Isaacman has criticized aspects of NASA’s human space exploration programs in recent years, calling the Space Launch System rocket “outrageously expensive” while petitioning the agency to fully fund the Chandra X-ray telescope. NASA had planned to decommission Chandra last year due to budget shortfalls in fiscal year 2025 but delayed that decision following pushback from scientists and Congress.

At the same time, Isaacman told Committee Chair Ted Cruz (R-TX) that NASA could “absolutely” stand up full missions to the Moon and to Mars, as well as run more scientific missions.

Sen. Gary Peters (D-MI) asked Isaacman if this would still be possible with budget cuts to NASA, adding that he believes “it’s pretty clear we’re likely to see constrained budgets.”

“If I’m confirmed, I absolutely am going to roll up my sleeves and get in the trenches with the best and brightest and figure out where we have our program challenges, what’s impeding progress, clear those obstacles and get back to delivering on the mission,” Isaacman answered. “If we can do that, then we’re going to get the inspirational side of NASA going, we’re going to get the STEM side growing, and the next generation is going to grow up and want to reach even farther.”

Ties to Musk

Cruz asked Isaacman whether he would commit to maintaining the International Space Station at least through 2030 if it is safe and scientifically feasible to do so. The CHIPS and Science Act authorizes funds for the ISS to 2030 and NASA currently plans to deorbit the station after that.

“There were those in the [first Trump] administration pushing to deorbit the International Space Station prematurely,” Cruz added. Democratic senators also noted that Elon Musk has suggested that the ISS should be deorbited as soon as possible to focus on a mission to Mars and that his company SpaceX has been awarded the contract to deorbit the ISS.

“Given that we’ve invested over $100 billion in the station, I think that would be profoundly foolish to give up on that investment, as long as it is safe to continue using it,” Cruz added.

Isaacman told senators he did not know of any reason why the ISS should be brought down before 2030 and he would like to understand Musk’s reasoning. “What I do think we need to do is maximize its remaining life, get as much of the high potential science and research to the station, figure out what that space economy is, so when the day does come to hand it off to the commercial LEO [low-Earth orbit] destinations they are in a financially self-sustaining type of way,” he added.

Sen. Ed Markey (D-MA) questioned Isaacman’s “deep personal and financial ties” to Musk, including paying millions of dollars to SpaceX for two private space flights and investing tens of millions in SpaceX, as well as his company maintaining a partnership with Starlink worth millions each year. Markey also referenced reporting that Musk personally asked Isaacman to lead NASA and asked whether this was true.

“You can understand why the public would be concerned about conflicts of interest here,” Markey added.

Isaacman did not answer whether Musk was present when Trump offered him the administrator position but told senators that he has not had any communication with Musk regarding his plan to manage NASA since the nomination.

Peters asked Isaacman how he would make sure Musk is not allowed undue influence over awarding or implementation of contracts, saying that Musk serves as both the CEO of SpaceX and a White House employee as the head of the Department of Government Efficiency that has slashed federal spending and contracts.

“My loyalty is to this nation, the space agency, and their world-changing mission,” Isaacman answered. “They’re the contractors. NASA is the customer. They work for us, not the other way around.”

Agency changes under Trump

In her opening statement, Ranking Member Maria Cantwell (D-WA) referenced reporting that NASA has laid off workers including its chief scientist, economist, and technologist; canceled research grants and $420 million in contracts; and may slash its science budget by 50%. She asked Isaacman whether he would reorganize NASA by closing any of its ten centers without congressional authorization and whether there should be personnel or budget cuts.

Isaacman did not specify whether he would close any of the centers or cut agency resources, saying he is “eager to understand” the considerations and current discussions around reorganization.

“I think NASA is going to require the best and brightest from across the nation and all of our critical infrastructure in order to achieve its mission,” he said.

Markey asked Isaacman whether he would commit to fully restoring and maintaining access to NASA’s data and to resisting any political pressure to sideline climate research at the agency. Markey pointed to reporting that previously publicly accessible climate datasets and visualizations have been altered or taken down since Trump took office.

Isaacman said he had not been made aware of any such changes to NASA datasets.