Lawmakers push back against Trump’s NASA cuts as Ted Cruz warns America could “lose to the Chinese communists” in the new space race

Texas – A fresh budget clash is unfolding in Washington after the Trump administration proposed deep cuts to NASA, triggering swift resistance from lawmakers across both parties who argue the move could weaken America’s position in an intensifying global space race.

The White House released its fiscal year 2027 budget request on April 3, calling for a 23% reduction in NASA’s overall funding. Even more striking, the proposal would slash nearly half of the agency’s science budget. The timing raised immediate concern. The announcement came just two days after NASA launched its Artemis 2 mission, with astronauts still traveling toward the moon aboard Orion—marking the first crewed lunar mission in more than half a century.

While the administration’s proposal outlines its priorities, Congress ultimately controls federal spending. And early signals suggest lawmakers are preparing to reject the cuts, much like they did the year before.

Bipartisan resistance builds

Opposition has come from both Republicans and Democrats, reflecting a rare area of agreement in an otherwise divided political climate. Many in Congress see NASA not just as a scientific agency, but as a symbol of national strength and global leadership.

Among the most vocal critics is Ted Cruz, who chairs the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation. Speaking shortly after a call with the Artemis 2 crew, Cruz emphasized that support for NASA has long crossed party lines. He noted that he has “worked very hard to keep strong support for NASA and American leadership in space, regardless of politics.”

But his warning went far beyond funding mechanics. He framed the issue as a high-stakes competition with global consequences.

“I’ve told President Trump this,” Cruz said, “I don’t want to wake up one day and look up at the moon and realize the Chinese have beat us there, that we’ve lost to the Chinese communists. I think the blow to America from that would make Sputnik look mild.”

That stark comparison reflects growing concern among U.S. officials that China’s space ambitions are accelerating. Beijing has publicly set a goal of landing astronauts on the moon by 2030, fueling fears that the United States could fall behind if funding becomes unstable.

Artemis program at the center

At the heart of the debate is NASA’s Artemis program, which aims to return humans to the moon by 2028 and build a long-term presence near the lunar south pole in the following decade. The program is also seen as a stepping stone toward future missions to Mars.

However, that timeline depends heavily on consistent funding over many years. Sudden cuts—especially to science programs—could ripple across the entire effort.

Experts say science is not a side component but a core driver of space exploration. It shapes how missions are designed, what technologies are developed, and how astronauts operate in deep space.

“We’re definitely enabling science, and it’s definitely important to every single one of us that we leverage science,” said Artemis 2 mission specialist Jeremy Hansen. “Science is what got us here, this ability to be able to send humans off of our planet.”

Even though the proposed budget keeps key Artemis systems intact, critics argue that cutting science funding undermines the broader mission.

Lessons from last year’s cuts

This is not the first time such a proposal has sparked alarm. Last year’s budget request included similar reductions, which were ultimately rejected by Congress. But before that happened, NASA still felt the impact.

Programs lost funding, and thousands of employees left the agency. Roughly 4,000 workers departed in 2025 through workforce reduction efforts, creating disruption across multiple projects. Many inside NASA and on Capitol Hill viewed those changes as both premature and potentially unlawful.

Cruz pointed to that experience as a warning, stressing that space policy has largely avoided the kind of partisan battles seen in other areas.

“We all know we’re living in a political time where there are partisan disagreements, where Democrats and Republicans can fight over what time of day it is, and somehow, miraculously, we have managed to avoid space and space exploration and NASA being pulled into that partisan bickering,” he said.

Congress signals rejection

That bipartisan stance was reinforced during a recent House Science, Space, and Technology Committee hearing. Lawmakers from both sides argued that the proposed funding levels simply do not match the administration’s stated goals of winning the race back to the moon and eventually reaching Mars.

Republican Chairman Brian Babin said plainly that the budget cannot support what NASA has been tasked to achieve. Democratic Representative Zoe Lofgren echoed that sentiment, suggesting the proposal is unlikely to survive the legislative process.

Cruz expressed confidence that Congress will ultimately step in once again.

“There is overwhelming bipartisan consensus in Congress: We are going to provide what is necessary to maintain American leadership in the moon, in Mars and in space across the board,” he said.

He also described his visit with NASA engineers during the Artemis 2 mission, emphasizing the importance of keeping politics separate from the agency’s work.

“I had a chance to talk to the engineers who are right now controlling the mission,” Cruz said, “And my message to all of them: Focus on the mission. Focus on the science. Focus on keeping everyone safe. Focus on getting it right. We’ll take care of the politics. We’ll keep that out of your way so you can do your job.”

A high-stakes outcome

As the budget debate moves forward, the stakes extend far beyond Washington. The outcome could shape not only the future of NASA, but also America’s role in space for decades to come.

With China advancing its own lunar plans and global competition intensifying, lawmakers appear determined to prevent funding cuts from slowing U.S. progress. The question now is not whether there will be a fight—but how far Congress will go to ensure the United States stays ahead in what many now see as a new space race.