Boston – The candidate of the NASA administrator, Jared Isaacman, says that he prioritizes, if necessary, the priority to the Lunar Exploration campaign of Artemis on human missions in Mars and will call a reduction in potential scientific financing of NASA and not an “optimal result”.
The Senate trade committee published the responses of April 24 by Isaacman to questions for the file of Republican And Democratic committee members After her confirmation hearing on April 9. The committee should vote on the appointment of Isaacman to the full Senate on April 30.
A theme in issues, mainly democratic members of the committee, involved reports just after the hearing that the White House proposes to reduce the financing of NASA scientific programs by almost 50% in its budget request for the financial year 2026. This would include the cancellation of several development missions, such as the Roman space telescope and the yield of Mars samples, and probably ending numerous missions in progress in prolonged operations.
Isaacman declared in the answers to several questions that he was not involved in the development of the 2026 budget proposal and that he was not aware of his details. “I did not examine or be part of the official discussions, but a reduction of ~ 50% to the NASA scientific budget does not seem to be an optimal result,” he said in response to a question from the Committee classification member, Senator Maria Cantwell (D-Wash), if he supported such a cup.
“If confirmed, I will plead with solid investments in space science-acrosing astrophysics, planetary sciences, earth sciences, lunar sciences and heliophysics-and to obtain as much funding as the government can reasonably allocate,” he wrote, answer another question on the scientific funding of Senator Brian Schatz (D-Hawaiii).
This includes seem to break with the White House on the future of the Roman space telescope. “To my knowledge, the Roman space telescope of Nancy Grace is in the process of completion and remains within the deadlines and in the budget-something which is unfortunately rare for the flagship programs of the agency,” he said in response to another question of Schatz. “I am not aware of any reason for which he should be canceled, and I would support his completion and his successful deployment.”
Questioned by the chairman of the committee, Senator Ted Cruz (R-Texas), if the program to return the samples of March should be “outsourced to the industry”, quoting a proposal to do so at Rocket Lab, Isaacman offered a response in a word: “Yes”.
Get Artemis “back on the right track”
A second theme of the questions concerned the effort and the suggestions of Nasaacman’s Artemis by Isaacman at the hearing that a human return to the Moon could be made in parallel with human missions in Mars. “We may in parallel with these efforts and make the quasi-impossible,” he said during the hearing.
Questioned by Cantwell that he would choose if there was funding only for the Moon or Mars, he chose the Moon. “Given the existing law, I would prioritize the Artemis program,” he wrote, but continued to say that making the Moon and Mars in parallel was possible, without going into details on the way it could be done.
“Historically, NASA has managed several complex programs simultaneously – Mercury, Gemini and Apollo – at one time with a much less technological capacity than we have today,” he said, not noting the differences in budgets between NASA at the top of the Apollo program in the mid -1960s and today. “More than six decades later, with the progress of industry and innovation, I believe that the leading world space agency should be able to execute several major initiatives at the same time.”
He reiterated his support for the space launching system and Orion as the fastest way to return to the Moon, while supporting a transition to commercial systems once this is done. “Once these obligations have been fulfilled,” he said about returning humans to the moon, “I believe that NASA should move away from competition with the commercial sector and rather concentrate its world -class talents and infrastructure on the development of the next generation of exploration technologies – including nuclear spaties – as a next logical step.”
“If confirmed, I will focus on the return of Artemis,” he wrote in an answer to a question by Senator John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.) About Artemis. “This means working alongside NASA managers, business partners and program managers to combat the deep causes of delays – bureaucracy, thoroughness of programs and lack of responsibility – and restore a mission culture through the agency.”
Cruz, in one question, expressed itself “concerning the suggestions that the United States abandons the legal requirement of NASA to maintain a material presence on or near the moon”. He asked Isaacman that he supported the “sustained human presence” specified by a law on the authorization of NASA in 2010.
“I undertook to follow the law – and as passionate about life space, I would like nothing more than to see the lunar operations become continuous, durable and routine,” wrote Isaacman in response, but called for “flexible policies” to allow it.
Musk links
A third theme of questions concerned links between Isaacman and Elon Musk, CEO of SpaceX, who was also an adviser close to President Trump.
Isaacman said that in answering many questions, he is not close to musk and does not often speak to him. “I do not have a close personal relationship with Mr. Musk. Although I told him about it from time to time over the years in my capacity as a spacex client, I would describe our interactions as professional,” he said in response to a question from Cantwell. “I admire and respect its contributions to space and technology, but it would be inaccurate to characterize our relationship as close.”
He called “1000% false” A report of Wall Street Journal in March This said that Musk had contacted Isaacman at the end of last year to see if he was interested in being a director of NASA, declaring that he had been contacted by the co -president of the transition team, Howard Lunick, about the work. He also denied having spoken frequently with Michael Altenhofen, a SpaceX official who is now a principal advisor to NASA.
Isaacman said he hadn’t spoken with Musk after the elections last November on NASA issues. However, in a cover of an exchange with senator Edward Markey (D-MASS.) At the confirmation hearing, Isaacman repeated to respond directly if Musk was present when the president elected Trump offered him the appointment.
“My interview was with the President of the United States,” he wrote in response to three questions from Markey on Reunion. “The person who asked me questions – and finally offers me the opportunity – the president himself.”