In an unusual bipartisan move, the Senate Commerce Committee is expected to adopt a bill next week intended keep the next president from making wholesale changes to NASA’s plans to send astronauts to Mars by the mid-2030s.

The $19.5 billion authorization package seeks to ensure agency stability after the November elections—something that was missing following the 2008 vote and administration change—by locking in that long-term goal. The measure also aims to prevent future cuts to development programs for rockets and spacecraft destined to reach the Red Planet.

For the first time in such federal legislation, there is language explicitly calling for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration to ultimately establish a human settlement on Mars. The bill says the agency ought to be aiming for “a capability to extend human presence, including potential human habitation, on the surface” of the planet by the end of the century.

The provision can’t legally bind future lawmakers, White House occupants or NASA’s leaders from charting a new course. And much will depend on funding availability and technological advances in coming years.

But by adopting a measure that specifically identifies getting to Mars as NASA’s paramount mission over the next two decades, the bill’s proponents want to make it politically harder for the next president or later administrations to scale back the effort—or perhaps change the goal altogether.


The bill affirms congressional support for “continuity of purpose” and criticizes past program cancellations for “placing the nation’s investment in space exploration at risk” and “degrading the aerospace industrial base.”

Sen. Ted Cruz, the Texas Republican who is chairman of the space subcommittee and a sponsor of the bill, said in an interview Saturday that “stability and predictability are critical” to NASA. He said the aim is to avoid “some of the battling and back and forth we have seen in the past” when a new President opts to dramatically change the agency’s course.

Noting that such previous shifts have resulted in major program disruptions, lost effort and wasted spending, Sen. Cruz added that the bill’s strong bipartisan support gives NASA the certainty that is essential if the U.S. wants to lead world in space exploration.

The provisions don’t include long-term cost estimates or proposed timetables, except to say “a thriving space economy” and human habitation “in space or on another celestial body” ought to be achieved “in the 21st century.” Still, it is rare for lawmakers to set even broad program goals so far in the future.


Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton and Republican hopeful Donald Trump have said little about space programs during the campaign, and the bill’s strong bipartisan backing suggests the language isn’t directed at either one. Sen. Cruz declined to comment on the views of the candidates.

Unlike many previous NASA bills, which focused primarily on tactical squabbles over funding levels for competing NASA programs, the latest legislation is big picture and more strategic. If enacted, it would explicitly put lawmakers on the record as agreeing that major changes in NASA’s current manned-exploration priorities would seriously delay and impede overall agency progress.

Sen. Ted Cruz (R., Texas) spoke to delegates from his home state during the Republican National Convention in Cleveland in July. Sen. Cruz sees the bill’s strong bipartisan support giving NASA the certainty that is essential if the U.S. wants to lead world in space exploration. Photo: Aaron Josefczyk/Reuters

Regardless of the outcome of the November elections, proponents believe the bill presents a compelling road map for the agency’s direction. The measure, setting spending levels basically in line with what Senate appropriators already have decided for the fiscal year starting next month, is expected to easily make it out of the panel.

But according to staffers and industry officials, it isn’t clear whether there is room in a crowded Capitol Hill legislative calendar to turn the bill into law. At the very least, the provisions provide a foundation for a multiyear spending plan for NASA likely to be considered in 2017.


The bill is consistent with arguments advanced by NASA Administrator Charles Bolden, who has expressed concerns about sustaining momentum across administrations. Various industry groups and think tanks also have urged NASA and lawmakers to avoid dramatic shifts during and after the coming White House transition.

“We’re closer to sending human beings to Mars today than anyone, anywhere” has ever been, Mr. Bolden told an international aerospace conference in Long Beach, Calif., last week. “We’re making real, tangible progress” toward that end, he said, adding that people outside NASA no longer smirk or question the goal when the issue of a Mars mission comes up. Instead, according to Mr. Bolden, agency officials are “seeing a new consensus emerge,” with industry and academic experts asking “how can we be a part of this?”

The committee, however, is poised to undercut support for one of NASA’s planned building blocks to develop advanced propulsion technology to reach Mars. The agency envisions spending some $1.4 billion to send a spacecraft to rendezvous with an asteroid, and then move it into orbit somewhere near the moon. The bill says the “technological and scientific goals” of the proposed mission “may not be commensurate with the cost; and alternative missions may provide a more cost effective and scientifically beneficial means to demonstration the technologies needed for a human mission to Mars.”

“ We’re closer to sending human beings to Mars today than anyone, anywhere. ” — NASA Administrator Charles Bolden

When President Barack Obama came into office, he blindsided Congress by canceling a multibillion-dollar program, called Constellation, intended to take U.S. astronauts back to the Moon. Instead, the Obama administration implemented a major policy shift by emphasizing commercial taxis and cargo tugs to serve the international space station. In some cases, the result was companies and industry groups pitting different committees and lawmakers against each other to divide up NASA’s limited dollars.


After years of White house battles with both the House and Senate, NASA and congressional leaders embraced a compromise that fostered commercial space initiatives but also earmarked billions of dollars annually to develop a heavy-lift rocket, called the Space Launch System, and a deep-space capsule, called Orion, destined to provide the foundation for eventual journeys to Mars.

The bill singles out SLS and Orion, saying it is imperative to fully develop them and related systems. Boeing Co. and Lockheed Martin Corp. would be among the biggest corporate beneficiaries of the robust funding.

On Saturday, Sen. Cruz said the language on human settlements reflect congressional desire to “assist NASA in planning toward long-term objectives,” while putting the U.S. on “the strongest footing possible” to follow through with those plans.

In sections dealing with the international space station, the bill mandates that NASA study the safety, feasibility and cost of extending operation of the facility through at least 2028, four years beyond the current deadline established by the agency and lawmakers. In addition, the measure wants NASA to develop strategies to foster commercial activities on the space station and elsewhere throughout low-Earth orbit.

Write to Andy Pasztor at andy.pasztor@wsj.com