A Senate Commerce Committee listening to sounded the alarm over the U.S.-China area race, emphasizing American dominance off Earth because the backdrop for NASA’s subsequent funding authorization.
Committee Chairman Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) opened the Sept. 3 listening to, titled “There’s a Bad Moon on the Rise,” by warning that the United States dangers shedding the moon to China if NASA’s Artemis program falters. The hearing centered on how America can keep forward within the new area race, with lawmakers urgent the significance of Artemis and reaffirming the necessity for the Gateway area station and to take care of steady operations in low Earth orbit (LEO).
Witnesses underscored that delays, finances uncertainty, or wavering commitments may undermine each U.S. trade and worldwide alliances, warning that uncertainty may drive companions and suppliers towards China’s accelerating lunar mission applied sciences.
Experts invited to testify included former NASA Administrator Jim Bridenstine; Allen Cutler, president and CEO of the Coalition for Deep Space Exploration; Mike Gold, president of civil and worldwide area at Redwire; and former Deputy Commander of the U.S. Space Command Lt. Gen. John Shaw.
These witnesses pointed to China’s recent progress, including a crew vehicle abort-system test in June, a Long March 10 rocket static fire in August, and a moon lander demonstration, as evidence of a systematic push toward the lunar surface.
“The countries that get there first will write the rules of the road for what we can do on the moon,” Gold said during the hearing. Other witnesses also emphasized this point — the nation that establishes a presence on the lunar surface first will set the rules of engagement for resources, governance, and international partnerships back on Earth.
One of the advantages China holds over the U.S., the witnesses say, is its government’s consistent uniformity and clarity of purpose for its lunar mission architecture. “The Chinese Communist Party is already employing its own integrated grand strategy for the Earth-moon system,” Shaw said.
“Getting cast to and fro from one administration to the next has been very damaging over time, and that’s the challenge with NASA,” Bridenstine added. “What we do is multi-decadal in nature, and sometimes it’s multi-generational, and you can’t just have it go back and forth.”
NASA’s Artemis program was repeatedly stressed as the centerpiece of America’s space exploration efforts, built around the Space Launch System (SLS) rocket and Orion capsule — the only human-rated super heavy rocket and deep-space crew vehicle currently flying.
Artemis 2, the first crewed mission to fly around the moon since the Apollo era, is slated to launch early next year, but witnesses noted that the U.S. still lacks a finalized lunar lander to support Artemis 3.
SLS hardware for missions through Artemis 9 is already in production. To actually land on the moon, however, NASA is relying on SpaceX’s Starship as its contracted Human Landing System. While its most recent test flight on Aug. 26 was hailed a total success, Starship’s development has slowed over the past year, and it has a long way to go before landing astronauts on the moon. The vehicle must prove its yet untested in-orbit refueling capability and land at least one uncrewed mission on the moon before NASA’s 2027 target for Artemis 3.
Bridenstine cautioned that the fragile and SpaceX-reliant infrastructure for mission success makes the current U.S. design vulnerable, citing the work remaining to get Starship operational and the need for “up to dozens” of refueling launches in order to complete each of its missions to the lunar surface. “Unless something changes, it is highly unlikely the United States will beat China’s projected timeline,” he said.
Gateway — the Artemis program’s pitstop space station in lunar orbit — has had a bumpy path inside the program’s architecture. At times it has been scrutinized, scaled back, or delayed. It was canceled in the president’s 2026 budget proposal, but Congress added Gateway funding back into the mix to the tune of $750 million per year, through fiscal year 2028. Though the bill is yet to be finalized, the orbital station is cast as the linchpin of sustainable exploration to enable longer stays, partner investment and cislunar monitoring.
“Over 60% of the Gateway’s costs are being borne by our international partners, representing billions that have already been spent building hardware” Gold explained. “Turning away from Gateway now would squander this unprecedented global investment in Artemis and force our international allies to seek partnerships with America’s geopolitical rivals,” he said.
“Conversely, if NASA reaffirms its commitment to Gateway, we can unlock billions of dollars of additional international investments, creating even more robust capabilities for Artemis, along with a windfall for the American taxpayer,” Gold said.
Witnesses and lawmakers wrestled with NASA’s budget priorities, highlighting concern that the administration’s 2026 budget request tilts heavily toward exploration while slashing science programs. That chopping block includes planetary defense missions such as OSIRIS-APEX, heliophysics research, major Earth science and climate missions and major cuts to workforce at NASA centers like Armstrong, Marshall, and Goddard.
Proponents say that Artemis is an economic engine, with NASA estimating that every $1 invested returns about $3 to the U.S. economy. “There are 2,700 suppliers that are part of the Artemis program,” Cutler said. “That covers everything from small mom and pop shops making valves, nuts, washers and all the way up.”
The tension underscored the committee’s dilemma to preserve momentum in NASA’s moon-to-Mars efforts without hollowing out the scientific missions that underpin NASA’s credibility and broad political support.
Cutler warned that preemptive slowdowns are already rattling suppliers, saying, “We need people working on Artemis — not working on their resumes.” He noted that uncertainty is especially damaging to small businesses that cannot weather contract disruptions, and that cutting momentum now risks gutting Artemis’ industrial pipeline just as China is scaling up its own.
Committee members and witnesses also linked NASA’s success to the continued operation of the International Space Station (ISS) and the agency’s efforts to utilize commercial space stations once the ISS is decommissioned sometime after 2030.
“This is a pivotal moment for our nation’s space program,” Cruz told hearing attendees. “America must maintain leadership in low Earth orbit while also embarking on a new era of exploration with Artemis.”
Gold cautioned that, without continued funding and near-term action, the number of U.S. astronauts aboard the ISS could fall from four at any one time to three to two. “For the first time in history, there will be more Chinese astronauts in space than Americans,” Gold warned, calling the prospect unacceptable.
Like the flocking of economic interests to China should they beat the U.S. to the moon, Bridenstine argued that failing to maintain a robust presence in LEO would not only weaken our country’s operations in space but also drive international partners toward China’s Tiangong space station and away from U.S. interests.
Shaw pressed for a broader national strategy that unifies civil, commercial and defensive space efforts. “I am an advocate for and a champion of a unified grand space strategy for our nation, for the Earth-moon system and beyond. Yet such a grand strategy, which would unify and synergize our national efforts across civil, commercial and national security activities in pursuit of common goals, opportunities and capabilities, does not currently exist,” he said.
Such a strategy, Shaw said, would set clear goals for America’s framework for an eventual crewed mission to Mars, by establishing clear guideposts for progress in areas like nuclear power, cislunar communications and space domain awareness, creating new commercial opportunities and avoiding fragmented efforts.
The outcome of the new space race, lawmakers say, has the potential to shape international policies and alliances, and the economic landscape of the globe for decades to come. “If [China] get[s to the moon] first, we will see a global realignment that will impact our economy, our tax base, our ability to innovate, and our national security,” Gold warned.
The hearing ended with an urgency illustrated in Cruz’s first remarks: “If our adversaries achieve dominant space capabilities, it would pose a profound risk to America.”