US greenlights billions for Moon missions despite Musk's opposition
Almost half the earmarked funds for NASA in 2025, or $4.1 billion (€3.49 billion), will build two Space Launch Systems (SLS) rockets for Artemis IV and V missions because it is the 'only human-rated rocket available that can get humans to the Moon'.
The Senate is also granting $2.6 billion (€2.21 billion) to the Gateway space station, the first international space station to be built around the Moon, which it says is 'critical for establishing a sustained human presence on the Moon.'
Musk has said in the past that the Space Launch System(SLS) rockets 'make him sad,' because they're not reusable, insinuating that a 'billion dollar rocket is blown up every launch'. The SpaceX CEO has also said the International Space Station (ISS) should be deorbited in favour of future Mars missions.
The move comes after a very public fallout between Musk and US President Donald Trump, who suggested the initial cuts to Artemis missions in the first draft of the budget review.
The rest of the 2025 budget for NASA includes funding for a Mars sample return rover, the procurement of the Orion spacecraft used for the Artemis missions, five years' worth of missions at the ISS and improvements to various American space centres.
Artemis, Gateway cuts could've hurt Europe
The previous NASA budget request only allowed funding to continue for the upcoming Artemis II mission, set to launch in 2026, and Artemis III, the first flight to return humans to the surface of the Moon, set for 2027. However, the budget cuts funding for future Artemis missions, including Artemis IV.
Ahead of the Senate vote, European experts warned Euronews Next that NASA cuts to the Artemis missions and other space programmes could have a detrimental effect.
The European Space Agency (ESA) builds European Space Modules (ESMs) that provide electricity and oxygen to Orion, the spacecraft picked by NASA for the Artemis missions to the surface of the Moon. The ESA also contributes three key elements for Gateway.
Experts previously told Euronews Next that if the Trump administration's budget were to be passed, Europe would lose 'guaranteed, sustained presence in cislunar space' if the Artemis missions were to be defunded.
There would have also been shutdowns to key production lines on the space modules and the Gateway hardware, they said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Euronews
2 hours ago
- Euronews
Exclusive: Anthropic and French AI firm Dust want to save you time at
US artificial intelligence (AI) company Anthropic, maker of the Claude large language model (LLM), is partnering with the Paris-based AI agent builder Dust as part of its scaled-up investment in Europe. They announced the joint venture on Thursday, sharing details with Euronews Next in an exclusive for Europe. It's the latest step in the race between technology companies to release agentic AI models, or AI agents, which do not just process information but also try to solve problems, make plans, and complete tasks. They differ from AI chatbots, which are designed for conversations with people and serve more as co-pilots than independent actors. Both Anthropic and Dust's co-founders previously worked at OpenAI, which made ChatGPT. Dust's clients include French tech champions Quonto and Doctolib, which TK. In the new partnership, Dust will help companies create AI agents using Claude and Anthropic's Model Context Protocol (MCP), which is an open standard to connect external data sources with AI tools. It can be thought of as a USB-C port for AI applications. The companies say this will create a central operating system where AI agents can access company knowledge and take action independently of human employees, while still keeping their data secure. "Companies have various AI tools across departments operating in isolation with no ability to communicate with each other," Gabriel Hubert, CEO and co-founder of Dust, told Euronews Next. He said that Dust can overcome this issue so that AI agents can work together on different tasks. AI's growing role at work – with or without people In his own work, Hubert said he uses AI agents to help him write job offers, analyse job applications and customer reviews, and other time-saving tasks. 'We've given ourselves the possibility to do something that I wouldn't have the time to do otherwise, and I still sign every offer letter that goes out,' he said. However, AI and AI agents are relatively new and still tend to make mistakes. For example, in a recent Anthropic experiment, an AI chatbot charged with running a small shop lost money and fabricated information. 'Claudius (the AI shop) was pretty good at some things, like identifying niche suppliers, but pretty bad at other important things, like making a profit. We learned a lot and look forward to the next phase of this experiment,' Guillaume Princen, head of Anthropic's Europe, Middle East, and Africa team, told Euronews Next. The project with Dust 'comes with a lot of power, [and] it comes with a lot of responsibility,' he said. Another 'tough problem to crack,' Princen said, is determining who is at fault if an AI agent does something wrong: the AI company, or the organisation using the tools? 'Understanding who's accountable when an agent does a thing sounds easy on the surface, but gets increasingly blurry,' he said. In some cases, AI agents could act as someone's 'digital twin,' he said, while other times they could act on behalf of a specific person, team, or company. Most companies haven't quite decided where they land. 'We tend to work with very fast-moving companies, but still on that one, we're realising that there is some education to do,' Princen said.
AFP
11 hours ago
- AFP
Philippine senator's plea to colleagues misrepresented as 'vow to defy constitution'
"We will be defying the constitution, we, the senators," Hontiveros is heard saying in Tagalog in a Facebook reel posted on June 26, 2025. It was shared after the Senate voted to send back to the House of Representatives the impeachment case against Vice President Sara Duterte (archived link). The vice president was impeached by the lower house in February on charges of graft, corruption and an alleged assassination plot against one-time ally and former running mate President Ferdinand Marcos. A conviction in the Senate would require the support of two-thirds of its 24 members, and would see Duterte removed as vice president and permanently banned from public office. Before the case can return to the Senate, the House must certify that it did not violate the constitution in its handling of impeachment proceedings and that it remained willing to prosecute the case after its new members take their seats. Hontiveros opposed the motion to send the case to the lower body, calling the decision a "functional dismissal'. Image Screenshot of the false Facebook post captured on July 1, 2025, with a red X added by AFP The clip also spread in similar Facebook and TikTok posts. "Wow, defy the constitution? You think you're more powerful than the country's laws?" read a comment on one of the posts. Another wrote: "She really wants to remove the vice president!" But the clip has been misleadingly edited to omit Hontiveros's full remarks. It was also earlier fact-checked by Philippine media organisation Vera Files (archived link). A reverse image search on Google using a keyframe from the falsely shared clip found it was taken from a news conference held by Hontiveros on June 9 (archived link). At the 9:15 mark, Hontiveros was asked if she thinks convening as an impeachment court is optional for the Senate. "Oh, definitely not. Definitely not," she says before responding further in Tagalog. "If we look at it and act as if convening as an impeachment court is optional, we will be defying the constitution, we, the senators. "And that's why I've been saying that will not allow this. As a senator, I will not agree to that." Her answer is also shown in the transcript of the press conference published on the Senate's website (archived link). Duterte's impeachment has spawned a wave of misinformation debunked by AFP here.
France 24
11 hours ago
- France 24
US House sets make-or-break final vote on Trump tax bill
Trump is seeking a green light in the House of Representatives for his Senate-passed "One Big Beautiful Bill" -- but faces opposition on all sides of his fractious party over provisions set to balloon the national debt while launching a historic assault on the social safety net. Republican House Speaker Mike Johnson spent much of Wednesday struggling to corral his rank-and-file members as the package scraped through a series of "test" votes that laid bare deep divisions in the party. It was set for a final vote to advance it from Congress to Trump's desk around 8:30 am (1230 GMT) after passing its last procedural hurdle in the early hours. "We feel very good about where we are and we're moving forward," an upbeat Johnson told reporters at the Capitol. "So we're going to deliver the Big, Beautiful Bill -- the president's 'America First' agenda -- and we're going to do right by the American people." Originally approved by the House in May, Trump's sprawling legislation squeezed through the Senate on Tuesday by a solitary vote but had to return to the lower chamber for a rubber stamp of the senators' revisions. #photo1 The package honors many of Trump's campaign promises, boosting military spending, funding a mass migrant deportation drive and committing $4.5 trillion to extend his first-term tax relief. But it is expected to pile an extra $3.4 trillion over a decade onto the country's fast-growing deficits, while shrinking the federal food stamps program and forcing through the largest cuts to the Medicaid health insurance scheme for low-income Americans since its 1960s launch. While moderates in the House are anxious that the cuts will damage their prospects of reelection, fiscal hawks are chafing over savings that they say fall far short of what was promised. Johnson has to negotiate incredibly tight margins, and can likely only lose three lawmakers in the final vote, among more than two dozen who have declared themselves open to rejecting Trump's bill. 'Abomination' #photo2 Republican leaders had been hoping to spend just a few hours on Wednesday afternoon approving the package, although they had some breathing room ahead of Trump's self-imposed Independence Day deadline on Friday. The 887-page text only passed in the Senate after a flurry of tweaks that pulled the House-passed version further to the right. Republicans lost one conservative who was angry about adding to the country's $37 trillion debt burden and two moderates worried about plans for around $1 trillion in health care cuts. Some estimates put the total number of recipients set to lose their health insurance under the bill at 17 million, while scores of rural hospitals are expected to close. Legislation in the House has to go through multiple preliminary votes before it can come up for final approval, and a majority of lawmakers must wave it through at each of these stages. But there were warning signs early on as the package stumbled at one of its first procedural steps, with a vote that ought to have been straightforward remaining open for seven hours and 31 minutes -- making it the longest in House history. Johnson had been clear that he was banking on Trump leaning on waverers, as the president has in the past to turn around contentious House votes that were headed for failure. The Republican leader has spent weeks hitting the phones and hosting White House meetings to cajole lawmakers torn between angering welfare recipients at home and incurring his wrath. "FOR REPUBLICANS, THIS SHOULD BE AN EASY YES VOTE. RIDICULOUS!!!" Trump thundered in one of multiple posts to his Truth Social platform that sounded increasingly frustrated as Wednesday's marathon voting session spilled into Thursday. The minority House Democrats have signaled that they plan to campaign on the bill to flip the chamber in the 2026 midterm elections, pointing to analyses showing that it represents a historic redistribution of wealth from the poorest Americans to the richest.
