First came the soul-stirring “Hello, World” photograph, the first complete view of the Earth captured by astronauts in 54 years. Next, astonishing images of the dark side of the moon as seen for the first time by human eyes. Then an emotional video, shared around the world, in which the space crew names a newly discovered moon crater in honor of their mission commander’s late wife.
It’s been eight days since NASA’s Artemis II team departed the Earth, and their mission has warmed hearts and staggered imaginations worldwide.
But away from the glamour of Mission Control, NASA’s science programs are staring down a slate of draconian proposed funding cuts for the second year in a row. The White House budget request for fiscal 2027 calls for $3.4 billion in cuts to NASA’s science budget — a nearly 50 percent reduction — and the termination of 40 missions.
“It’s frankly jarring,” said Michael Mann, a climate scientist at the University of Pennsylvania, in an email to POLITICO’s E&E News.
“On the one hand, we have this stunning example of the spirit of discovery and scientific exploration that made our country what it is today,” he said. “And on the other hand, we are witnessing an unprecedented assault on science itself, including the critical Earth science that NASA and other governmental agencies are doing to study our imperiled planet, so spectacularly captured in the iconic Artemis mission photo.”
NASA is hardly the only science agency facing existential threats. The White House proposal would slash NOAA’s budget by $1.6 billion, or more than 25 percent, and cut funding for EPA, the National Science Foundation and the National Institute of Standards and Technology each by about half. It would also reduce funding for the National Institutes of Health by 13 percent and the Department of Energy’s science office by 16 percent.
The proposed reductions echo last year’s White House budget request, which also called for deep cuts to science programs. Congress ultimately rejected most of these proposals in the 2026 budget it passed in January.
But the new request shows a continuation of President Donald Trump’s widespread assaults on U.S. science, reigniting the anxieties of U.S. researchers.
The Trump administration last year gutted staff by the thousands at agencies, including NOAA, NASA and EPA. It altered or deleted hundreds of federal databases and websites and froze or canceled thousands of federal research grants. It also touted scientific misinformation, including discredited theories about the safety of vaccines and the causes of climate change.
Juxtaposed against the Artemis II mission, which has reinvigorated public interest in space science and innovation, scientists say Trump’s latest proposals stand out in even sharper relief.
“It’s inspiring to see the nation celebrate Artemis II’s trip to the moon,” said Andrew Dessler, a climate scientist at Texas A&M University, in an email. “But the celebration rings hollow when the administration is cutting the very thing that makes it possible: a robust government-funded research apparatus.”
Rep. George Whitesides, a California Democrat and former NASA chief of staff, said the mission’s success has been bittersweet against the backdrop of federal disinvestment in research.
“I think in any normal time this would be the crowning achievement of the last few … decades,” he said in an interview. “As it is, Artemis becomes sort of an echo of what America could still be, but is not today, because of the attacks on science.”
‘The best of America’
Scientific research wasn’t Artemis II’s primary motivation, policy experts are quick to point out. Its main goal is to pave the way for humans to return to the surface of the moon.
The mission is still conducting research on a wide range of subjects, from lunar geology to human health in space. But science is an “add-on,” according to Erik Conway, a science historian at Purdue University and former historian at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory.
That means the mission is aligned with the Trump administration’s priorities, which include support for crewed space exploration. The 2027 White House budget requests $8.5 billion for the Artemis program, with the goal of landing astronauts on the moon by 2028. It also calls for $175 million for robotic lunar missions aimed at building a lunar base camp that would “establish U.S. dominance on the moon.”
Still, Conway noted, “I’m certain images and events like [Artemis II] will excite people about science. Excitement’s always been a pipeline into science that NASA counts on.”
Kei Koizumi, a former special assistant to the president and principal deputy director for science, society and policy during the Biden administration, added that the Artemis program has deep foundations in federal research.
“These are missions that are only possible because of decades of investment by NASA and other science agencies in fundamental science that enable us to even think about venturing beyond the planet Earth,” said Koizumi, currently a lecturer at George Washington University, in an interview.
The mission speaks to the country’s long history as a global science leader, he added — an international reputation that’s now threatened by Trump’s continued attacks on the U.S. research infrastructure. That’s a concern American scientists have frequently echoed over the past year.
“Our scientific enterprise is a primary reason we have a robust, world-leading economy,” said Dessler, the Texas A&M scientist. “Cutting government funding for science will drag our economy down and eventually lead us to becoming a second-rate country.”
It remains to be seen whether Congress will reject Trump’s latest round of proposed budget cuts. Whitesides, the California Democrat and former NASA chief of staff, suggested it’s likely — and added that the latest budget request is a “slap in the face” after lawmakers funded most of the targeted science programs for 2026.
“I sense that there is real anger on the part of both sides in Congress about this budget proposal when it comes to science agencies,” he said. “There could not be a clearer rejection than the appropriations bills that were passed in January.”
U.S. science leadership is “absolutely at risk” under the Trump administration, he added — and that’s part of the reason Artemis II’s success has drawn so much public attention.
“Artemis is the best of America, and that is I think why people are having such an emotional reaction to it,” Whitesides said. “It reminds us of what we could be at a time when the administration is betraying American values left and right every hour of the day.”
