Andy Kim Asks NASA Administrator Nom: Can We Reach Both ‘Moon And Mars On The Current NASA Budget?’

4/10/2025

During Wednesday's Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee hearing, Sen. Andy Kim (D-NJ) questioned Jared Isaacman, the nominee to be Administrator of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, about his efforts to reach the Moon and Mars.

Fuel your success with Forbes. Gain unlimited access to premium journalism, including breaking news, groundbreaking in-depth reported stories, daily digests and more. Plus, members get a front-row seat at members-only events with leading thinkers and doers, access to premium video that can help you get ahead, an ad-light experience, early access to select products including NFT drops and more:

https://account.forbes.com/membership/?utm_source=youtube&utm_medium=display&utm_campaign=growth_non-sub_paid_subscribe_ytdescript

Stay Connected
Forbes on Facebook: http://fb.com/forbes
Forbes Video on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/forbes
Forbes Video on Instagram: http://instagram.com/forbes
More From Forbes: http://forbes.com

Transcript

00:00Thank you Mr. Chairman. Thank you. Senator Kim. Yeah, thank you Chair. Mr.

00:06Isaacman, I'd just like to start with you. I guess I just wanted a little more

00:09clarity about are you committed to having a permanent presence on the moon?

00:16Senator, I think the biggest thing is we need to get back there. It's been taking

00:21a very long time and the American taxpayers have invested an awful lot. I agree

00:25with you on that front. I think we can take that for granted between me and you.

00:28But I guess I want to get a sense because you know the chairman laid this out

00:32actually and then the poster that he had wasn't just about getting back to the

00:35moon but it was about sustaining a presence on the moon and I just feel

00:39like I don't have a good understanding of what your actual position is right now

00:43on that. Well I think Senator, again, the first step to me is to return to the moon

00:48and determine its economic, its scientific, and its national security value for

00:53remaining there. I saw that in your statement and I guess again I was

00:58confused because in your response to the chairman you were talking about how

01:01you know Helium-3 this is something that could very well shift the balance of

01:04power within the you know here on earth. What else are you looking at? Like what

01:10else is in your mind right now beyond Helium-3 and the impacts there when

01:14you're talking about scientific, economic, and national security? Well Senator that's

01:18what I mean that's what we need to get there to find out. You know all the best

01:21science fiction movies out there have something like Helium-3 as the

01:25economic justification for an enduring presence not just on the moon but for

01:30out throughout you know space exploration. So I guess you know kind of as we've

01:34been talking about this you know moon Mars two priorities you were much more

01:38definitive about saying we need to get to Mars. So I guess I just want to ask you

01:42that same question what are the scientific economic and national security

01:46priorities that you see more clearly when it comes to going to Mars right now

01:50than in terms of having a permanent presence on the moon? Well Senator to be

01:54clear I certainly hope in the future that we have lots of space stations, a

01:58full lunar outpost, a Mars outpost, and we're pushing even beyond that. I'm just

02:02saying we need to get back to the moon. We need to figure out why we need to be

02:06there and I certainly hope there is a reason. Why do we need to be, like what I'm

02:09trying to get a sense of you seem much more definitive about saying we need to

02:12get to Mars and putting resources towards that effort. What are the specific economic,

02:18scientific, and national security interests you see there? Because I get a

02:22sense that you have some greater clarity there than you do when it comes to the

02:25moon. Well I would actually hope you're getting a sincere answer from me

02:30that we should be doing both and the other things. Now Mars... You think we can do

02:34both moon and the Mars on the current NASA budget? I sure hope so. NASA is it was

02:39built to do the near impossible and have a thriving space economy in low Earth

02:43orbit and continue extraordinary science missions to kind of unlock the

02:47secrets of the universe, sir. Well I guess I just want to reinforce what the

02:51chairman said. I mean I think we need to have much more clarity in how we're

02:54talking about what it is our objectives when it comes to the moon. As mentioned

02:58you we have a lot more clarity about what China's objectives are and I hope that

03:02that is something that you can clarify quickly if you are confirmed. When it comes

03:06to the International Space Station, what is your perceived timeline there in

03:10terms of when we should be starting to bring that down? Well Senator, first of all I

03:16I don't know of any reason why we should be bringing it down before what's

03:19currently scheduled. What I do think we need to do is maximize its remaining life,

03:23get as much of the high potential science and research to the station, figure out

03:28what that space economy is, so when the day does come to hand it off to the

03:31commercial LEO destinations they are in a financially you know self-sustaining

03:35type way. And you talked about that in terms of the space economy. In terms of what

03:39should succeed the International Space Station, do you believe that that should be

03:43commercial only or do you see prospects of the US government or a government run

03:48space station to succeed the International Space Station? Well right now

03:52Senator if we don't figure out the space economy whether it's commercially

03:55operated or not it's going to be entirely financially sustained by the

03:59government. So do you but I guess I'm asking what is your do you have a

04:03preference in terms of you see a sense of need for a government run I guess I'm

04:09just trying to ask you what is it that NASA can do that commercial efforts can't

04:14do? Well that's it I mean that's a fantastic question Senator I mean the

04:18line should be drawn again at in terms of NASA undertaking the near impossible

04:22challenges that again no company organization or agency anywhere in the

04:27world would be able to would be able to undertake it. I gave a very good example I

04:31think in my opening remarks on nuclear propulsion that's something that no

04:34company would ever embark upon there is no obvious economic return there's

04:39regulatory challenges that's exactly the kind of thing that NASA should be

04:42concentrating its resources on. Well I say I just want to say here and I know I'm

04:46running out of time I'm really hard to see I think we're all very proud of the

04:51astronauts that are here in this room but I think I could speak for them and

04:55say look we also recognize the importance of the civil servants and playing

05:00so many different roles for the safety and the innovation that's out there as I

05:03expressed to you I am concerned about how this administration has approached what

05:08I believe are indiscriminate cuts at different and firings at different

05:12departments and agencies and if you're confirmed I hope that you stand up

05:15against indiscriminate cuts I think we're all very recognizing that they're

05:19places for efficiencies and elsewhere but we need to make sure that we're

05:22protecting the expertise that's out there

Andy Kim Asks NASA Administrator Nom: Can We Reach Both ‘Moon And Mars On The Current NASA Budget?’

Category

Transcript

Recommended