Trump confidant Elon Musk wants NASA to drop its ambitious plans to return to the moon and instead head straight to Mars. Congress is ready to put up a fight.
Republican and Democratic lawmakers, who control NASA’s purse strings, want Americans to return to the lunar surface in 2027 — and they’re not willing to abandon that mission despite Musk’s obsession with skipping the moon for Mars.
The division sets up a potential showdown with Republican policymakers and the influential Trump ally over one of the most consequential space policy decisions this century.
President-elect Donald Trump has, at least for now, stayed out of the fray. His first administration launched NASA’s plans to land on the moon, but he has also pressed the agency on why it can’t go directly to Mars.
“To bypass the moon would be a mistake,” said Texas Rep. Brian Babin, the Republican who leads the House committee focused on space.
But that’s what Musk, a billionaire space entrepreneur, wants to do. The SpaceX founder dreams of a Mars mission that would preserve human life beyond Earth, even if it costs hundreds of billions of dollars and poses extreme risks to those involved. He’s called colonization of the planet “life insurance for life.”
“We’re going straight to Mars,” Musk posted recently, adding that the moon focus was a “distraction.”
The Mars-first strategy, though, would likely find little support on Capitol Hill. Lawmakers want to focus on preserving jobs tied to moon exploration efforts, support a lunar economy and beat China in space. And since they shape NASA’s budget, the policymakers play a powerful role in the agency’s ambitions.
“There would be a lot of congressional resistance,” to any Mars-first plans, said Casey Dreier, chief of space policy at The Planetary Society, a nonprofit focused on space exploration.
The House and Senate Science committees strongly affirmed their support for moon exploration in NASA reauthorization bills last year.
A switch to Mars would impact programs such as the moon-focused Space Launch System, a multibillion-dollar rocket that provides jobs in numerous states. The rocket is a key part of Artemis, NASA’s effort to get back to the moon and eventually establish a lunar space station.
“We have put a lot of time, effort and money into Artemis, and I think we should allow NASA to complete that mission,” said Sen. Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.), a former astronaut.
Mars brings other technical challenges — such as timing. It’s a three-year round-trip mission, versus three days to the moon. And the physical stress of long-term space flight could also endanger the crew once they land.
The U.S. must go to the moon first, said outgoing NASA Administrator Bill Nelson. “You’ve got to learn to walk before you run.”
Musk has long voiced support for traveling to the red planet. It’s not clear whether his January post referred to NASA’s current efforts or a separate SpaceX-funded mission to Mars. Musk and SpaceX did not respond to requests for comment.
Trump hasn’t publicly chosen a side. He supported a return to the moon in his first term but has since shown increased interest in Mars.
The president-elect castigated NASA’s focus on the moon in a June 2019 tweet. A month later he repeatedly asked then-NASA Administrator Jim Bridenstine about the possibility of going to Mars directly. His transition team did not respond to a request for comment.
Mars also could prove a financial loss to lawmakers. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas.) and Babin, for example, have promoted the development of the commercial space industry and could end up deflating business interests in space if they switched NASA’s focus to Mars.
And Congress’ moon advocates worry a shift would cede the lunar surface to China, which plans to land its own astronauts there by 2030.
“If we do not beat the Chinese to the moon, they are going to write the rules of the road up there,” Babin said.
But going against Musk brings its own set of concerns. He’s already threatened to fund primary challenges against Republicans who didn’t back Trump’s cabinet picks, and contesting his space ambitions could prove politically risky.
“Is it more important to be aligned with the leader of your party?” said Dreier, the space expert. “Or is it more important to fight for those technician and engineering jobs that go to your state?”
Joe Gould and Connor O’Brien contributed to this report.
