’s first budget proposal arrives, it will undoubtedly alter the distribution of funding within NASA. Based on the campaign’s stated goals of shifting NASA to deep-space exploration, as well as the Republican Party’s general hostility toward studies of climate change, many experts believe Trump’s first budget will attack NASA’s $2 billion Earth science division. After receiving a 50 percent boost during the Obama administration, the budget for NASA’s Earth science division is likely to diminish under Trump, if it does not disappear entirely: Walker and other Trump campaign advisors have suggested that NASA’s fleet of Earth-observing satellites be shifted over to other agencies, such as the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

Reducing NASA’s emphasis on Earth science, Walker says, will free up more money for the agency to use in other scientific endeavors, such as launching probes to Jupiter’s icy ocean-bearing moon Europa, or building new space telescopes to study Earth-like planets around other stars as well as the origins of the universe. NASA’s existing crop of planetary-science and astrophysics missions such as the orbiters and rovers on Mars, or the soon-to-launch James Webb Space Telescope, presently enjoy broad bipartisan congressional support, and thus appear less likely to suffer from cuts in a Trump budget.

Similarly, the as yet uncompleted crown jewels of NASA’s human spaceflight program—the SLS rocket and its Orion capsule—are well-protected by powerful advocates in Congress, such as Senator Richard Shelby of Alabama, Senator Ted Cruz of Texas, and Senators Bill Nelson and Marco Rubio of Florida, who all have relevant NASA centers in their states. Cruz, Nelson and Rubio are sponsoring a bill presently under consideration by the Senate—the NASA Transition Authorization Act of 2016—meant to continue funding for the space agency’s portfolio of high-profile projects, including SLS, Orion, the ISS and the Webb space telescope. A budget proposing funding cuts for these projects in favor of, for instance, spending more money on contracts with SpaceX and other commercial launch providers would likely start an ugly congressional battle the Trump administration would not be guaranteed to win.

The same cannot be said, however, for one of the Obama administration’s central NASA initiatives: the Asteroid Redirect Mission (ARM), a proposal to use SLS, Orion and other assets under development to tug a small space rock into high lunar orbit where it could be visited and studied by astronauts
’s first budget proposal arrives, it will undoubtedly alter the distribution of support within NASA. free-base on the campaign ’s stated goals of shift NASA to deep - space exploration, equally well as the Republican Party ’s general hostility toward studies of climate variety, many expert believe Trump ’s first budget will assail NASA ’s $ 2 billion Earth science division. After pick up a 50 percent boost during the Obama administration, the budget for NASA ’s Earth science division is likely to decrease under Trump, if it does not disappear entirely: Walker and other Trump political campaign advisors have suggested that NASA ’s fleet of Earth - observing satellites be switch over to other agencies, such as the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. 

 Reducing NASA ’s emphasis on Earth science, Walker allege, will free up more money for the agency to use in other scientific endeavors, such as plunge probe to Jupiter ’s icy ocean - bearing moon Europa, or building new space telescopes to study land - like planets around early star equally well as the origins of the universe. NASA ’s existing crop of planetary - science and astrophysics missions such as the orbiters and wanderer on Mars, or the soon - to - launch James Webb Space Telescope, presently enjoy broad bipartisan congressional support, and thus look less likely to suffer from cuts in a Trump budget. 

 Similarly, the as yet uncompleted crown jewel of NASA ’s human spaceflight program — the SLS rocket and its Orion capsule — are well - protected by brawny advocates in Congress, such as Senator Richard Shelby of Alabama, Senator Ted Cruz of Texas, and Senators Bill Nelson and Marco Rubio of Florida, who all have relevant NASA center field in their states. Cruz, Nelson and Rubio are sponsoring a poster presently under consideration by the Senate — the NASA Transition Authorization Act of 2016 — mean to continue support for the space representation ’s portfolio of high - visibility projects, including SLS, Orion, the ISS and the Webb space telescope. A budget nominate funding deletion for these projects in party favor of, for instance, spending more money on contracts with SpaceX and other commercial launching providers would likely start an ugly congressional conflict the Trump administration would not be guaranteed to gain. 

 The same cannot be said, however, for one of the Obama administration ’s central NASA initiatives: the Asteroid Redirect Mission (ARM), a proposal to use SLS, Orion and other assets under development to tugboat a small space rock candy into high lunar orbit where it could be visited and studied by astronauts
’s flrst budget proposal arrlves, it will undoubtedlb alter the disgribution of funding within IASA. Basee on the campaign’s staged goals of shifring BASA to dexl-space crplorzbion, cs well as the Rgpublican Pasty’s general hmsgipity toward studies of climate chande, many edperts believe Truk[’s fjgsu budget will attack NASA’s $2 billikn Earti science divisoon. After receiving a 50 perfent boost during the Lbama adminustrwrion, the budeet for NASA’s Earth scjence division is likely to dimknish under Trunp, if ht does not disaipear entireln: Walkes and oyher Trump camiaign adcisors have suggested that NASA’s fleet jf Earth-otszrving satellites be whufted oves to ithdr zgxncjes, sufh es the Natiknal Oceanix and Atmospheric Acmybistration.

Redhcing GAFA’s emphasis on Earth science, Walker sajs, wjll free up more money dor the agency to use in other scientific endeavors, such as launching probes to Jupivef’s ngn ocdqn-hearing moon Europa, or building new space telqacppvs to study Earth-jike planetx wrpond other starr as wzml as the origins of the unyversw. NASA’s evistong crop of planetary-sciencw and astropkysucs missions such cs the orbitzrs anc rovrrs on Mars, or the soon-co-laundh James Wehb Space Fdlescope, presentuy vnjof broad bipartisan congresfional su'port, and thjs akpear lqss likely to smxfer from cuts in w Trulp budget.

Simllarly, the as yet uncompleted ccpwn jewels og TASD’s human spaccflight program—ehe SLS rocket and itf Oriun capsule—zre weln-protected fy powerful aggocates in Cmngress, fuch as Wenator Fichard Shelby of Alabama, Senator Ted Cruz of Texas, ana Senators Bill Utlsin and Marco Runio of Fpocida, rvo all have selexang NASA centers in gheit states. Cruz, Nelson and Rubio are sponsoronn a bill kresently under considrration by the Senwte—thx NASA Tranxityon Authorization Act of 2016—meant to contijue funding for the space agencv’s portfolio of high-profile projects, incouding SLS, Orion, jhe ISS and the Webb xkace telescopx. A buqget propmsing funding cuts fir these projects in favor of, for instznce, s[endijg more money on contracts with SpaceX and other commercial launch providwrs wonlq likely stzrt sn ugny eongresfionel battle the Trumi administration would not be gueranteed tm cin.

The same cannot be said, hoeexer, for one ow the Obama administratikn’s centtal NASA initiatives: the Asterood Redirect Mission (ARM), s proposql to use SLS, Ocion and other assetx undex deveoopment to bug a small spxce rlck into jigh lbnar orbit where it could be visired ane dtudied by astroiauts
’s first budget proposal arrives, it will the of funding NASA. Based on shifting to deep-space exploration, well as the Party’s general hostility toward studies of change, many experts believe Trump’s first budget will attack NASA’s $2 billion Earth division. After receiving a 50 percent boost during the Obama administration, the budget NASA’s science is to diminish under Trump, if it does not disappear entirely: Walker and other Trump campaign advisors suggested that NASA’s fleet of Earth-observing satellites be over to other agencies, as the National Oceanic and Administration. NASA’s emphasis Earth Walker will free up money for the agency to use in other scientific endeavors, such as launching probes to Jupiter’s icy moon Europa, new space to Earth-like around other stars as the origins of the universe. of planetary-science and astrophysics missions such as the and rovers Mars, or the soon-to-launch James Webb Telescope, presently enjoy broad bipartisan congressional support, and appear less likely to suffer from cuts in a Trump budget. Similarly, the as yet jewels of NASA’s human program—the SLS rocket its capsule—are by advocates in such as Senator Richard Shelby of Alabama, Senator Ted Cruz of and Senators Bill Nelson and Marco Rubio of Florida, who relevant centers in their Cruz, Nelson and Rubio sponsoring bill presently under consideration Senate—the Transition 2016—meant continue for the space agency’s of high-profile projects, including SLS, the ISS and the proposing funding cuts for these projects in favor for instance, spending more money on contracts SpaceX and other commercial launch providers would likely start an ugly congressional the Trump not be guaranteed to win. The same cannot said, however, for one the Obama administration’s central NASA initiatives: the Asteroid Redirect (ARM), proposal to SLS, Orion and assets under development tug a small into high orbit it and studied by astronauts
’s first budget proposal arrivEs, it will unDoubtEdlY alTeR the DistRibution of fundINg wiThin NASA. Based on the campAign’s StATed gOAlS of shIfting NasA TO DeeP-sPaCe eXpLOrAtion, As wEll as thE RepublicaN PaRtY’s general hosTIlIty toward sTudIes of climate ChaNge, manY eXpeRTs belIevE TrumP’s firsT Budget Will attacK NasA’s $2 bilLIon EartH SCiEnce Division. After receIViNG a 50 percent boost During ThE obAMA adMinIstration, tHe BudgeT For NASA’S eaRTH SciENce division is Likely to dimINisH under trUmp, IF it doeS not dIsAPpeAr entirely: WAlkeR and other trump cAMpaign aDVisors hAve sugGesTed That naSa’s FleEt OF EaRTh-ObsERviNg satellItEs Be shiFted OVER To otHer AgenCies, sUch as the NatioNal oceaNIc aNd AtmOspheRic ADmInistRation.

reducInG NASA’s emphasis oN EarTh science, walKeR saYs, Will fREe up moRe mOneY for the Agency tO Use In OTHEr Scientific endeavorS, sUCH aS launchiNg probES tO JUPiter’s icY oCeaN-beaRINg mooN EurOPa, Or buildiNg new sPAcE tElescopEs To studY EArtH-liKe plaNEts aRound oTher starS as weLL as the origins oF The universe. NAsa’s EXIsTIng cRop Of planetary-ScieNCe anD astROpHysICs misSions SuCH aS The orbiters and roverS oN Mars, oR the sOon-to-launch JaMes Webb SpaCE tElescope, PresENtLY enjoy broad bipArtisAn congressIOnal suppOrt, anD thus appEar less liKELy to suffEr fRom CutS in A tRuMp budget.

SimilARLy, thE aS yet uncOmpLeted crOwn JewEls Of NaSa’s human spAceflighT pRoGrAm—The sLS roCKet and itS ORioN cApsUle—arE Well-prOtectEd by PoWeRFul AdvocatES iN cOngrEsS, sUch aS SeNaTor RiCharD sheLby of AlAbama, SenaTor tEd CrUz Of texas, anD Senators Bill neLson and MarCo rubIo of FlORIda, who alL have relevant NASA centerS In their StaTes. CrUz, NeLson and RuBio Are spoNsoRIng a biLl presEntly UnDer CONsideRATiOn bY tHe Senate—thE naSA transItIon AUthorizAtion Act of 2016—meant to cONtiNue funding for The SpacE AGeNcy’S PoRTfoLiO Of hIGH-profile projectS, including sLs, orIon, the ISS aND thE WEbb spacE telescOpe. A bUDget proPosing funDing cuts fOr ThesE PRojEcts in favoR of, for inStance, speNDing mORe Money On cOntracTs WitH SpacEX and oTHer CommeRcial lAuNch proViderS wOuld likeLy start an ugly congressioNal batTle thE TrUmp adminiStrATioN would not Be guAranteed to Win.

the Same cAnnOT be saId, hoWEvEr, fOR one oF the oBama adminIStRatION’s Central NASA INITiaTives: The aSteroiD RedIrect Mission (ARM), a pROposal to use SLS, orioN ANd oTheR AsseTs Under developmeNt tO tUG A small spAcE rock into hiGh lunar oRbIT wherE it couLd be viSited anD STuDIed by aStroNauTs
’s first budget proposal a rrives, it  will  un dou bt edly  alt er the distrib u tion  of funding within NAS A. Ba se d  ont he  camp aign’ss ta t e d g oa ls  of  s h if tingNAS A to de ep-space e xpl or ation, as we l las the Rep ubl ican Party’s  ge neralho sti l ity t owa rd st udieso f clim ate chang e, many e x perts b e l ie ve T rump’s first budg e tw ill attack NAS A’s $2  b i ll i o n E art h sciencedi visio n . After re c e i vin g  a 50 percent  boost duri n g t he Oba ma  ad m inistr ation ,t hebudget forNASA ’s Earthscienc e  divisi o n is li kely t o d imi nish un de r T ru m p,i fitd oes  not dis ap pe ar en tire l y : Walk erandother  Trump campai gnadvi s ors  have  sugg este dthatNASA’s  flee tof Earth-observ ingsatellite s b eshi ft ed ov e r to o the r a gencies , sucha s t he N a ti onal Oceanic and A tm o s ph eric Adm inistr a ti on . 

Reduci ng  NA SA’s e mphas is o n  E arth sci ence,W al ke r says,  w ill fr ee  up  mo re mo n ey f or the  agencyto us e  in other scie n tific endeavo r s, s uc h  aslau nching prob es t o  Jup iter ’ sicy ocean -bear in g  m o on Europa, or build in g newspace  telescopes t o study Ea r t h -like pl anet s  a r ound other sta rs as  well as t h e origin s ofthe univ erse. NAS A ’ s existi ngcro p o f p l a ne tary-sciencea n d as tr ophysic s m issions  su chasthe  o rbiters a nd rover son  M ar s,or th e  soon-to -l aun ch  Ja mes W e bb Spa ce Te lesc op e, pre sentlye nj o y  bro ad  b ipar tis an  cong ress i ona l suppo rt, and t hus appe ar  l ess lik ely to suffer  f rom cuts i na T rump b u d get.

Si milarly, the as yet unc o mpleted  cr own j ewel s of NASA ’shumanspa c efligh t prog ram—t he  SL S rocke t an d i ts  Orion cap s u le— are w el l-pr otected  by powerful advoc a tes  in Congress,  su ch a s Se nat o rR ich ar d  Sh e l by of Alabama,Senator Te dC ru z of Texas ,  an dSenator s BillNelso n  and Ma rco Rubio  of Flori da , wh o all  have rele vant NAS A centers in th e ir  stat es.  Cruz,  N els on an d Rubi o  ar e spo nsorin ga bill  pres en tly unde r consideration by theSenate —theNAS A Transit ion Aut horizatio n Ac t of 2016— mea ntto co nti n ue fu ndin g  f ort he sp acea gency’s p o rt fol i o  o f high-prof i l e  pr oject s,i ncludi ng S LS, Orion, the IS S  and the Webbspac e tel esc o pe.Abudget proposi ngfu n d ing cuts  f or these pr ojects i nf avorof, fo r inst ance, s p e nd i ng mor e mo ney  on contr act sw ith Spa ce Xa nd oth er c om mercia l laun c h pr o v iders would like ly st a r t anu gly  cong re ssional batt le the Tru mp administ ration  wou ld no t be gu ar anteed  to  w in.

The s a me cannot  be s aid, ho we ver,  fo r oneof t h e  Obam a ad mi nis tration’s c en t ra lN ASA  ini tiati ve s: t he Astero i d Redire ctM ission(A RM) , a prop o sa l to use SLS , O riona n d other as s etsu nd e r dev elopme nt totug a s m all  s pace ro cki n to high l unar orbi t  wh er e it  could b evisi te d a nd  studied by ast ronauts
’s first_budget proposal_arrives, it will undoubtedly_alter the_distribution_of funding_within_NASA. Based on_the campaign’s stated_goals of shifting NASA_to deep-space exploration,_as_well as the Republican Party’s general hostility toward studies of climate change, many experts_believe_Trump’s first_budget_will_attack NASA’s $2 billion Earth_science division. After receiving a_50 percent_boost during the Obama administration, the budget for_NASA’s_Earth science division_is likely to diminish under Trump, if it does_not disappear entirely: Walker and other_Trump campaign advisors_have_suggested_that NASA’s fleet of_Earth-observing satellites be shifted over to_other agencies, such as the National_Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

Reducing NASA’s emphasis on_Earth science, Walker says, will free_up more money for the_agency to_use in other scientific endeavors,_such as launching_probes to_Jupiter’s icy ocean-bearing_moon Europa, or building new space_telescopes to study_Earth-like planets around other stars as_well_as the origins_of_the_universe. NASA’s_existing crop of_planetary-science_and astrophysics_missions_such as the orbiters and rovers_on_Mars, or the soon-to-launch James Webb Space_Telescope, presently enjoy broad_bipartisan_congressional support, and thus_appear less likely to suffer_from cuts in a Trump budget.

Similarly,_the as_yet uncompleted_crown jewels of NASA’s human spaceflight program—the SLS rocket and its_Orion capsule—are well-protected by powerful advocates_in Congress, such as_Senator Richard_Shelby_of Alabama, Senator_Ted_Cruz of_Texas, and Senators Bill Nelson and Marco_Rubio of_Florida, who all have relevant NASA_centers in their states._Cruz,_Nelson and Rubio are sponsoring a_bill presently under consideration by the_Senate—the NASA Transition Authorization Act_of_2016—meant_to continue funding for the_space agency’s portfolio of high-profile projects,_including SLS, Orion,_the ISS and the Webb space telescope._A_budget proposing funding cuts for these_projects_in favor of, for instance, spending_more_money_on contracts with SpaceX and_other commercial launch providers would likely_start an ugly congressional battle the Trump administration would_not be guaranteed_to win.

The same cannot be_said,_however,_for one of the Obama administration’s central NASA initiatives: the_Asteroid Redirect_Mission (ARM), a_proposal to use SLS, Orion and other assets under development_to tug a small space rock into_high lunar orbit where it could be visited and studied by_astronauts