White House space policy adrift as Trump eyes Mars mission without clear leadership

White House space policy adrift as Trump eyes Mars mission without clear leadership

As US President Donald Trump vows to send Americans to the moon and Mars, the White House’s space ambitions are being undercut by a striking lack of direction, say industry leaders and Capitol Hill insiders. With no clear authority driving US space policy, critical decisions are being made in isolation—leaving NASA’s future uncertain and stakeholders confused, Politico reported.

“There’s nobody in charge right now,” said one space industry official. “It’s just a lot of individuals trying to set individual goals and policies.”

A Mars mission with no roadmap

The administration’s 2026 budget proposes sweeping changes that would drastically reshape NASA, slashing billions from science missions—including those relevant to Mars exploration—and redirecting funds toward an aggressive push to land humans on Mars. The move aligns with Trump’s inaugural promise to redefine American space power and echoes goals long championed by SpaceX CEO Elon Musk.

Yet, the decision-making behind these shifts remains opaque. Key officials haven’t been confirmed, including NASA nominee Jared Isaacman, who supports space science missions that the new budget threatens to cut. NASA declined to comment on the apparent contradiction between Isaacman’s positions and the proposed budget.

No council, no coordination

The absence of the National Space Council, traditionally responsible for crafting and coordinating White House space policy, has only deepened the confusion. Though the administration plans to revive the council under US Vice President JD Vance, it remains unstaffed—and it’s unclear how engaged Vance intends to be.

Congressional aides and industry leaders say they have no clear line of communication with the administration on space. “It’s a little ambiguous about where the decisions are flowing from,” one aide said. “If we have an issue, who do you talk to?”

Other offices, like the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP), have filled the vacuum, albeit in limited ways. Two OSTP officials, Peter White and Charles Powell, are said to be handling space matters, though their influence is modest. The OSTP has focused on technical tasks like setting a lunar time standard, rather than broader strategic policy.

Cuts driven by budget hawks

Much of the space industry suspects that the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), led by Russell Vought, is the driving force behind the NASA cuts. Vought previously ran the Center for Renewing America, a conservative think tank that in 2023 proposed halving NASA’s science budget. The 2026 proposal mirrors that vision.

“If it was primarily decisions being driven by OMB, I would say that’s a pretty poor way to do space policy,” said Todd Harrison of the American Enterprise Institute.

The National Security Council (NSC), once a central player in space policy, is also in flux. A recent leadership shake-up and staffing cuts under new National Security Adviser Marco Rubio have reduced its influence. Of a dozen industry officials interviewed, only one had any interaction with the NSC.

Hope tied to Isaacman and the Space Council

Experts say Jared Isaacman’s eventual confirmation and a functional Space Council could bring needed clarity. But that depends on whether their input will matter. “If the Space Council is not deeply consulted... then the whole thing kind of falls apart,” warned Jack Kiraly of the Planetary Society.

Until then, America’s space ambitions appear untethered—propelled more by presidential speeches than by coordinated strategy.