The new White House budget proposal for NASA’s 2027 fiscal year has sparked sharp criticism from the scientific and space communities. Experts warn that the proposed cuts could deal a serious blow to American space science, Space.com reports.

Large-Scale Cuts

According to the draft budget for 2027, NASA’s overall funding is planned to be reduced by 23%. Even more severe reductions are proposed for the Science Mission Directorate, whose budget is set to drop from $7.25 billion to $3.9 billion — nearly half (a 47% reduction).

The Planetary Society, a leading nongovernmental organization focused on space policy, described the proposal as extraordinarily opaque and unprecedented in its lack of transparency.

Casey Dreier stated that the proposal represented the least transparent NASA budget request he had ever seen, noting that he had personally reviewed every NASA budget request since 1960.

Lack of Transparency

Unlike previous budgets, the new document does not include a clear list of missions slated for cancellation. Determining what is being cut requires manually comparing figures with previous years. In addition, data on funding levels from prior years — a feature included in NASA budget documents for more than 60 years — has been removed.

Experts also point to the appearance of large, vaguely defined spending categories. For example, a line item labeled “Mars Technologies” totaling $438 million is described in very general terms without detailed breakdowns, even though the amount exceeds the entire budget of the heliophysics division.

A Repeat of a Previously Rejected Plan

Casey Dreier noted that the 2027 proposal essentially resembles a copy of last year’s budget proposal, which Congress had already rejected in a bipartisan vote that restored funding for science programs.

He explained that the proposal repeated the same mission cancellations and the same severe cuts, suggesting that little had been learned from the earlier rejection.

If adopted, the budget could affect more than 40 scientific projects — roughly one-third of NASA’s overall portfolio. Among those potentially impacted are active missions such as New Horizons, OSIRIS-APEX, and Juno, as well as several international collaborations, including the European Mars rover Rosalind Franklin rover.

Threat to International Cooperation

The proposed cuts could significantly damage the United States’ reputation as a reliable partner in space exploration. According to Dreier, at least a dozen joint international missions could be at risk.

At the same time, the budget maintains relatively strong funding for the crewed Artemis program, including preparations for a human landing on the Moon. Critics argue that this approach prioritizes human spaceflight at the expense of fundamental science, which has few private-sector alternatives.

Dreier emphasized that space science is a resource-intensive endeavor with uncertain outcomes and very long timelines, making it an area where private investors and commercial markets cannot effectively replace government support.

Reaction from Congress and the Public

Despite the severity of the proposal, experts expect strong resistance in Congress. Similar cuts were rejected last year, and in March more than 100 lawmakers signed a bipartisan letter calling for increased funding for NASA science programs.

The Planetary Society has already relaunched its Save NASA Science campaign and is encouraging supporters to contact their congressional representatives, participate in advocacy events on April 19–20, and support space policy initiatives.

Casey Dreier described the situation as a very serious threat to NASA science and stressed the importance of preventing the cuts from taking effect.

In Brief

The White House has proposed reducing NASA’s 2027 budget by 23% and cutting funding for scientific missions by nearly 47%. The proposal has been criticized for its lack of transparency and for closely resembling a previously rejected budget plan. Dozens of active and planned missions — including major international projects — could be affected. Experts at The Planetary Society describe the proposal as a serious threat to U.S. space science and are urging Congress to once again protect funding for fundamental research. While the Artemis program remains a priority, fundamental science could face significant challenges.