The White House “skinny” for NASA is out

The White House released its 2026 “skinny” budget by agency Friday morning, May 2nd.  A "skinny" budget is just another term for top-line, total numbers for agencies and their programs, with little content on specific programs.  We just know that Ars Technica's headline on their story says the agency, "seeks to end SLS, Orion, and Lunar Gateway." 

The big picture is that the budget is cut a bit more from the preliminary budget number we saw in mid-April of an overall cut by 20 percent, which talked about the overall total of $25 billion being cut to $20 billion.  Today's numbers are a bit more aggressive; from 25 to $18.8 billion.  

The big cuts talked about in that April article were to the science programs of NASA, arguably the most productive programs with more missions to brag about than the manned side.  That hasn't changed much.  

These include a $2.265 billion reduction in Space science and a $1.161 billion reduction in Earth science. Perhaps the most notable cancellation here is the Mars Sample Return mission, which the budget proposal says will be achieved by human missions to Mars.

In fairness, the Mars Sample Return (MSR) mission was effectively cancelled in 2023.  In September of that year, NASA received a report from an independent review board saying that the Mars Sample Return Mission was unworkable in its current form and wasn't feasible on the schedule and costs they were working under.  They started another series of proposals and bids to come up with a mission they could afford and had a decent chance of working.  By this past January, that looked to essentially be a dead end. 

The new statement that they'll fold MSR into early manned missions to Mars may be the only way it gets done. 

The Budget phases out the grossly expensive and delayed Space Launch System (SLS) rocket and Orion capsule after three flights," the document states. "SLS alone costs $4 billion per launch and is 140 percent over budget. The Budget funds a program to replace SLS and Orion flights to the Moon with more cost-effective commercial systems that would support more ambitious subsequent lunar missions."

As a reminder, NASA has contracted with both SpaceX and Blue Origin to develop reusable landers for the Moon, and both of these systems include vehicles to move from Earth orbit to the Moon.  

It seems to me that the major change in this budget proposal is the first mention of funding for manned missions to Mars. 

"By allocating over $7 billion for lunar exploration and introducing $1 billion in new investments for Mars-focused programs, the Budget ensures that America’s human space exploration efforts remain unparalleled, innovative, and efficient," the document states.

Under the Trump administration, NASA will seek to reach both the Moon and Mars. The goal, stated in the document, is to refocus NASA "on beating China to the Moon and putting the first human on Mars." Unfortunately, there is no information on what these "Mars-focused programs" will be. Some of this new funding would almost certainly go to SpaceX. The company, founded by Trump ally Elon Musk, explicitly focuses on establishing human settlements on Mars.

The tradeoff of more money for the moon and Mars is less money for the ISS, but the budget still commits to flying it until 2030. "The Budget reduces the space station’s crew size and onboard research," the document states. "Crew and cargo flights to the station would be significantly reduced. The station’s reduced research capacity would be focused on efforts critical to the Moon and Mars exploration programs."

It seems reasonable to me.  We can't increase spending every year and we can't keep adding to our debt.  We've all bitched about the horrifically bad SLS but the reason these programs happen is that cost plus jobs both enable cheating and reward it, yet we find NASA leaders want more cost plus and fewer fixed price contracts.  Last August in a post about "Boeing's SLS - There's Nothing Like It" there was a link to an article about Boeing's bad quality control and manufacturing.  The report points out the root cause of these issues is that “Boeing’s quality control issues are largely caused by its workforce having insufficient aerospace production experience. The lack of a trained and qualified workforce increases the risk that the contractor will continue to manufacture parts and components that do not adhere to NASA requirements and industry standards.”  

In refusing to penalize Boeing for these quality issues, NASA and Deputy Associate Administrator Catherine Koerner are actually rewarding Boeing for these quality issues. This is a "cost plus" contract.  It pays for all of Boeing's expenses, plus a fee. That style contract is incentivizing things like hiring the untrained and unqualified workforce. Need some welders? Go find some winos that have never been within 10 feet of a welding setup. If it takes more time and the stage needs to be scrapped and rebuilt - you make money on it instead of paying for it. 

Artemis I mission during one of its trips to the pad that didn't result in flying. NASA Photo.