07/11/2025 / By Cassie B.
In a shocking blow to America’s space program, NASA is set to lose nearly 2,700 employees, including 875 senior-level experts, as the Trump administration accelerates its campaign to slash federal bureaucracy. The cuts, approved following a Supreme Court ruling backing the White House’s workforce reduction plans, will strip NASA of decades of institutional knowledge while private companies like SpaceX dominate spaceflight.
A proposed 2026 budget would gut NASA’s funding by 25 percent, forcing the agency to operate with its smallest budget since the 1960s. Critics warn the move could surrender U.S. space leadership to China.
Internal documents reveal NASA plans to eliminate 2,694 positions through early retirements, buyouts, and deferred resignations. Among those departing are 875 GS-15 employees — the agency’s highest-ranking civil servants — and 1,818 core mission staff working in science, human spaceflight, and exploration. The hardest-hit facilities include Goddard Space Flight Center (607 cuts), Johnson Space Center (366), Kennedy Space Center (311), and NASA headquarters (307).
Casey Dreier, chief of space policy at The Planetary Society, warned Politico that the cuts risk dismantling NASA’s technical leadership. “You’re losing the managerial and core technical expertise of the agency,” he said. “What’s the strategy and what do we hope to achieve here?”
NASA spokesperson Bethany Stevens defended the restructuring, stating, “NASA remains committed to our mission as we work within a more prioritized budget. We are working closely with the Administration to ensure that America continues to lead the way in space exploration, advancing progress on key goals, including the Moon and Mars.”
The downsizing comes as SpaceX and other commercial firms increasingly dominate space launch capabilities, raising questions about NASA’s future role. While proponents argue privatization drives efficiency, critics fear the brain drain will cripple long-term missions.
Former NASA Chief of Staff George Whitesides blasted the cuts on social media, writing, “Indiscriminately firing the next generation of NASA scientists, engineers and wider team members is exactly the wrong step to secure America’s leadership in space—just as competition with China is reaching fever pitch.”
The proposed 2026 budget would slash NASA’s science funding by 47 percent, canceling 41 missions, including the Mars Sample Return project, climate monitoring satellites, and planned Venus expeditions. Seven former NASA science directors condemned the plan in a letter to Congress, warning it would cede U.S. dominance to China’s “aggressive, ambitious, and well-funded” space program.
Lawmakers may resist the cuts, with bipartisan opposition already mounting. The Senate Commerce Committee has signaled support for protecting NASA’s workforce, setting up a clash with the White House.
Democrat Senator Mark Kelly likened the staff exodus to sabotaging the Apollo program, posting on X: “What would’ve happened if 2,000+ senior NASA leaders were pushed out before the moon landing? We would’ve lost the space race to the Soviets. And now we risk losing the next space race to China.”
With the voluntary departure program closing July 25, NASA faces further layoffs if targets aren’t met. The agency’s future now hinges on whether Congress intervenes or allows the cuts to proceed, reshaping American space exploration for decades.
Sources for this article include:
Tagged Under:
big government, Collapse, Donald Trump, Federal Budget Cuts, federal downsizing, government debt, government spending, Job cuts, money supply, NASA, progress, Space Race, White House
This article may contain statements that reflect the opinion of the author
COPYRIGHT © 2018 GOVERNMENTDEBT.NEWS
All content posted on this site is protected under Free Speech. GovernmentDebt.news is not responsible for content written by contributing authors. The information on this site is provided for educational and entertainment purposes only. It is not intended as a substitute for professional advice of any kind. GovernmentDebt.news assumes no responsibility for the use or misuse of this material. All trademarks, registered trademarks and service marks mentioned on this site are the property of their respective owners.