I feel like I should be doing a disclaimer here: I swear I'm not making this up. While I've regularly referred to the SLS as an abbreviation for the "Shuttles' Leftover Shit" that's a relatively new version of that acronym. Before that it was known as the "Senate Launch System" - as in "it only exists because enough Senators were bought." My proof I'm not making this up is the link to Eric Berger's story at Ars Technica.
All of the original US senators who created and sustained NASA's Space Launch System rocket over the last 15 years—Bill Nelson, Kay Bailey Hutchison, and Richard Shelby—have either retired or failed to win reelection. However, a new champion has emerged to continue the fight: Texas Republican Ted Cruz.
The only surprising aspect of Ted Cruz taking over to fight to keep SLS is that fact that he's considered to be a conservative, but the bitter truth is that SLS is good for the recipients of the billions of dollars spent on an SLS launch and he's simply doing the same things that Bill Nelson, Kay Bailey Hutchison, Richard Shelby and hundreds of senators down through time have done: he wants to take taxes from people in all 50 states to pay for government programs that benefit only a small percentage of his constituents.
Now Cruz is taking a position that makes this seem like a small thing. He's selling it as the only way we can beat China to the moon.
Earlier this year, Cruz crafted the NASA provision tacked onto President Trump's "One Big, Beautiful Bill," which included $10 billion in funding for key space programs, and in two notable areas directly undermined White House space policy goals.
As part of its fiscal year 2026 budget, the White House sought to end funding for the Space Launch System rocket after the Artemis III mission, and also cancel the Lunar Gateway, an orbital space station that provides a destination for the rocket. The Cruz addendum provided $6.7 billion in funding for two additional SLS missions, Artemis IV and Artemis V, and to continue Gateway construction.
In various addresses and statements this year, Cruz has emphasized that his priorities for NASA are to beat China to the moon and start permanent settlements there. I think I can agree with the priorities, it's how he plans to do it that give me heartburn. I consider every penny spent on SLS to be as close to absolute waste as we can get short of melting them down and throwing out the zinc and while we might need to use SLS for the next launch or two, we can't get rid of SLS fast enough for me. And by the way, that $6.7 billion for two more Artemis launches probably isn't enough, since a number closer to $4.5 billion per launch is regularly thrown around.
This week, Cruz will hold a hearing titled, "There’s a Bad Moon on the Rise: Why Congress and NASA Must Thwart China in the Space Race." It is scheduled for 10 am ET on Wednesday.
If you go to the link in that paragraph, you'll see that while the hearing is scheduled for September 3rd, the rest of the website is dated August 27, the Wednesday before the hearing. One of the "interesting" developments in who will be attending since that notice is that all attendees who had links to the commercial space world have been dropped or uninvited.
It's conceivable - though hard to believe - that Ted Cruz thinks NASA is doing this by themselves with the major contractor of SLS, Boeing with no commercial space involvement at all. He would have to be remarkably uninformed to not realize the both SpaceX with Starship and Blue Origin with their Mark II have been contracted to deliver lunar landers. Not coincidentally, both Starship and Blue Origin's New Glenn are reusable - unlike SLS. That means both Starship and New Glenn are likely to be able to launch to the moon more often than SLS, which so far hasn't been able to meet a launch date for its first crewed launch, Artemis 2. As you'll recall Artemis 1 launched in November of '22, so we're coming up on a three year turnaround and the advertised date is next spring, so more like 3-1/2 years between launches.
Another spaceflight advocacy organization, the Space Frontier Foundation, said it is healthy for Congress to have a robust debate about how the country should compete with China on the Moon. However, to do so, there should be a wide variety of viewpoints.
"The topic of our country’s strategy for competing for this new territory on the Moon, not just for the first footprint but the longer-term impact, is extremely important," said Sean Mahoney, executive director of the foundation. "We need better than just window dressing. We need an honest, realistic discussion about the costs, the risks, and the alternatives. It’s too important for this to just be something that gets a little bit of attention and then pushed through."
I couldn't agree more.
This is the launch vehicle for Artemis II, photo from their factory in New Orleans before it was shipped to Florida. One of the Shuttles' Leftover engines had to be replaced, bottom right in this picture. Image credit: NASA
