Jared Isaacman: What went wrong at NASA | The All-In Interview
1756 segments
Jared Isaacman was nominated by
President Trump to become the 15th
administrator of NASA in December. He
passed out of the Senate committee in
May and was set to be confirmed by the
full Senate this week. However, on
Friday, President Trump withdrew his
nomination for Isaacman. We asked Jared
to sit down with us for a conversation.
We dive into everything. his experiences
as a successful entrepreneur, fighter
jet pilot, commander of the world's
first all civilian space flight and the
first civilian to conduct a spacew walk.
What he saw in his six months studying
NASA. How American government
bureaucracy has eroded its performance
and puts the nation at risk in the great
space race underway with China. And what
really happened? Was it a discovery
about prior donations to Democratic
candidates or an association with Elon
Musk that lost him the nomination?
Here's my conversation with Jared
Isaacman.
All right, besties. I think that was
another epic discussion. People love the
interviews. I could hear him talk for
hours. Absolutely. We crushed your
questions in a minute. We are giving
people ground truth data to underwrite
your own opinion. What do you guys
think? That was fun. That was great.
Jared, welcome. I, like many space
enthusiasts, was thrilled for your
nomination to lead NASA as the 15th
administrator of the agency. Founded in
1958, the year after the Russians put
Sputnik into orbit, NASA's perhaps, in
my opinion, the US government's most
pioneering agency, having organized and
led our exploration missions to the
moon, Mars, the outer solar system, and
beyond, as well as the launch of
important scientific missions to observe
the Earth, to observe our solar system,
and the deep universe, and of course,
the installation and operation of the
ISS. and you seemed really qualified for
the job as uh a business manager, a
successful
entrepreneur, a flight and space
enthusiast. So, I'm really curious to
hear your views on NASA, the space
industry overall, the race with China,
and frankly hear a little bit about what
the heck just happened with your
nomination. A lot of people have a lot
of questions that we'd love to hear your
point of view on. So, I thank you for
joining me today, Jared. I'm thrilled to
be here to chat. And as a someone who's
been a space enthusiast since
kindergarten, whether it's through the
lens of commercial space or, you know,
the great space race from the 1960s or
NASA today, like these are all subjects
I get pretty charged up about. So, love
to chat about what inspired you to get
into space. You went to Embry Riddle
Aeronautical
University and you later became an
entrepreneur, but were you always kind
of obsessed with space and did you
always dream of doing what you got to do
last year, which is walk in space? Yeah,
so the this is all my parents fault.
They um they skimped out on a babysitter
as a kid and just put me in front of the
TV. So, uh, I was watching movies like
Top Gun, uh, The Rights Stuff, um, Space
Camp, the movie, you know, 1980s movie
where if you go to Space Camp, a robot's
going to launch you into space. This was
all stuff in like my elementary school
year. So, um, I mean, I told I just
showed it to my kids last week, by the
way. So funny that you say that. I I
pulled up Space Camp. I had to buy it
because it's not on any of the streaming
services to show it to my kids. Yeah.
Okay. I've been to Space Camp to like
speak to the students a number of times
and I ask them like, "All right, raise
your hands if you've seen the movie
Space Camp here and know who Jinx is and
like no one raises their hands and that
just goes to show I'm I'm old." So, so
you were always into it. Is is that what
you wanted to do to work in aeronautical
engineering or as a pilot or what were
you thinking of doing? Yeah, I mean so
kind of interesting start to the story.
I mean I um I started my day job which
is shift for you know it's a it's a
pretty large large fintech now when I
was 16 and I was just like most you know
as you know entrepreneurs you're you're
burning yourself out waking up on the
keyboard and you know I said I need a
hobby in life uh so I picked up my
passion for flying and I I I basically
had parallel careers you know in
aviation and in and in business and I
started flying air shows in uh in 2010
and 2011. 11 and I was flying with a
bunch of really talented ex-military,
even current military pilots and they
were like, you know, you could fly in
the, you know, in the Air National Guard
or the reserves and um and I found out,
well, wow, that's amazing. You can fly
fighter jets part-time and serve the
country. You need a college degree. I
never had one cuz I I started my
business at 16. So, that's actually why
I went back to why I went back to
school, went to Embry Riddle because
it's a I mean, it's an aviation school.
Uh I think it graduates um more Air
Force pilots every year than the Air
Force Academy. But anyway, that that's
ultimately why I I got my degree. But my
my pursuits kind of in parallel of of
business and aviation has existed, you
know, really since I was a teenager. So
you're running this business. So Shift
4, just for those who are listening, is
a payment processing company that is a
public company today, $8.5 billion
market cap. So you've built an
incredible business. And then on the
side, my understanding is you've flown
like 7,000 hours in fighter jets and
you've tried to beat the
circumnavigation record a couple of
times now. So, were you kind of going to
work and then on the weekends flying? I
mean, how did you kind of balance
running a company trying to do that
today while balancing this podcast? I
can tell you it's really hard to do that
and anything else. It's like how did you
how did you do that? Well, I mean, you
know, again, I started my business at
16. I started flying a couple years
after that. You know, this is before you
have a, you know, a family and other
responsibilities. So, like literally all
I was doing was working and flying.
Mostly flying at night, which was
great. You know, I did that around the
world record flight. Didn't get it in
08. Broke it broke that record in09. We
did it to raise funds for Makea-Wish
Foundation, which was which was cool.
And it was a great challenge. And then,
um, later on started flying air shows,
which was great. And you know, we did a
lot to raise money for Make a Wish
there. And then we we kind of took uh
the air show flying, which was just
maximum fun, super adrenaline, and was
like, we're we're doing loops and rolls
to music, you know, 10 ft off the
ground, 18 in between our wings. We
probably should pivot this to something
that keeps the fun factor up, but has
some commercial intent, also helps the
country. So, we started a a defense
company called Draen. We w up assembling
the world's largest fleet of fighter
jets, jets just like this behind me. And
we were professional bad guys for the
Department of Defense, the Air Force.
Like we would fly as aggressors just
like in Top Gun replicating Russian and
Chinese Iranian tactics. I literally I
mean I remember at Christmas parties in
you know 2014 2015 speaking to the to
the workforce I was like I hope you all
know next to commercial space and what
Elon's doing at SpaceX. This is the
second coolest company. Like we get to
be professional bad guys all the time.
It was awesome. So I again I've had two
awesome parallel careers. Um, but hey,
running two companies like nothing
compared to Elon. I think I I can't even
He's got to be up to like a half a dozen
CEO titles uh in parallel right now. Not
to mention trying to save the, you know,
the country um you know uh and get it
back on a good fiscal footing. So, it's
my my responsibilities are pale in
comparison. Well, so when did you first
meet Elon and how did you meet him? So,
it's interesting and I almost like
guarantee you wouldn't uh remember it.
Uh after well, first I think like in
early 2000. So, I started my fintech in
1999. I actually think we were on like
the same like uh old uh it was like a TV
show being interviewed um in the early
2000s and we that was probably the first
handshake. It was after we set the uh we
broke actually the uh I'm sorry we
didn't break the record. This was in
2008 the around the world record. We
came up short. Peter Demanis, Dr. De
Manis reached out and um asked if uh if
I wanted to go to Bikenor and see a
Soyuse launch with some of the uh kind
of early commercial space pioneers. I
remember, you know, all the Google
founders were on that
TU154, you know, Russian transport. I'm
like, man, if if this thing goes down,
you're you're wiping out a lot of like a
lot of brain power here because Sergey
Larry, Eric Schmidt was on it. And that
that was um it was coming back from
that. I think there was a charity poker
event or something at Elon's house in um
it was early days of of Tesla. So, I
think I met him again there, but but
really we you know, like we don't know
each other that well. I've only spoken
to him, you know, a couple dozen times
maybe over the years and almost entirely
related to my commercial space missions,
Inspiration 4 and Plaston. Oh, so you're
not like super close with him because I
think there's this narrative that you
and Elon have a secret, you know, deep
connection and he's one of your best
friends. And you know, that's kind of
like how how your hearing went when I
look on the some of the video clips of
how some of the senators were treating
you. They're like, "Oh, you're you're
doing this all for Elon. He's your best
friend."
Yeah, you know, the sen I think almost
every one of the senators on both sides
of the aisle made that assumption and
asked a lot of questions on that. And I
said, look, I Elon is one of the most
accomplished, if not the most
accomplished entrepreneur in modern
history. Every one of his companies sets
out to solve some of the greatest
engineering problems for all
humankind. Even his, you know, kind of
super selfless service to the to the
government of trying getting us back on,
again, like I said, sound fiscal
footing. Um, I admire a lot of what he
does, but but honestly, and I told the
senators, my connection is I I I paid
his company to go to space twice. And
look, if there was more than just SpaceX
out there offering the service and you
had competition, I probably would have
paid less. Like, it's like, so if
anything, I'm very pro competition in
this regard. And uh, you know, I don't
consider myself beholden to Elon at all.
I want to see all of commercial space
succeed. I'm I'm a huge space
enthusiast. Let's go through that. So,
you met Elon. Did you get involved as an
investor in SpaceX along the way? How
did the inspiration 4 mission come to
be? In uh 2020, uh I did hear that, you
know, SpaceX was doing another one of
its secondary rounds and I was connected
through, you know, I think it was city
and I w up speaking to the CFO at uh at
SpaceX and he's like, "No, look, the you
know, funding round is closed and um you
know, we're kind of pretty selective on
on who we let in." I was like, "Okay,
great. Well, hey, you know, back in
2008, I actually got the uh the first
offer to pilot the first Dragon
spacecraft, which is wild to think
about, like 2008. And um even if I can't
be an investor, you know, at some point
or another, I'd love to have an
opportunity. And he was like, well,
can't be an investor now, but we could
talk about uh a human spaceflight
mission. And I had no idea I was going
to have an opportunity to be the first.
I assumed there was a lot of people in
front. And um man, it was uh what a
privilege to be able to do that. Um be
part of mission design and select a crew
of inspiring individuals and raise a
quarter of a billion dollars for St.
Jude. And it was just a successful
mission. It helped open the door for a
lot of other commercial missions to
come. So awesome experience. So in 2021,
you commanded inspiration 4, which was
the first all civilian space flight
using the SpaceX Crew Dragon. Yep. And
that was just truly like a momentous
mission. It was just so beautiful to
watch. And I remember it was also like a
tough year because it was a year after
co. So it was so great to see that
happening. But I had assumed and I think
a lot of people had assumed that you
were like a big investor in SpaceX or
really tight. But it just happened
within a a one and a half year or year
period that you kind of went from, hey,
I'd love to put some money into SpaceX
to, oh, I can participate and command
inspiration for and get out there into
space. Like that's a year and a half
days. Like I like literally from that
phone call in, you know, October, um,
Inspiration 4 was born. A week or two
later, we did a like a ceremonial
signing at the uh at the Crew One
launch, which is wild, too. And it
speaks to the confidence of SpaceX that
they were ready to sign up for the first
commercial, like the first civilian
mission to orbit before they even
returned operational capability uh for
human space flight to NASA. Now, they
did demo two, of course, with with Bob
and Doug, but crew 1 had not flown when
SpaceX said, "We're going to get this
done." And then 10 months later, we were
in orbit, and it was an incredible
experience. And obviously, we followed
it up with a whole development program
with Polaris and um and flew a second
mission as well. So, yeah. So, just
going back, you said you were made, you
were given an offer to pilot a Crew
Dragon in ' 08. Is that correct? When
did that how did that happen? So it was
it was right after I came back from that
around the world flight and again I said
you know Dr. Dmanis reached out and uh
we met in the city and he was like you
seem to be like kind of thinking the way
we think uh in in terms of you know a
more exciting future in transportation
and and aerospace. Now of course his
interests cover everything from like
human life extension to he likes to
solve a lot of world problems too. Yeah.
And it was through those connections and
coming out to
Bikenor that I did get that uh I did get
that offer. I still have the agreement.
It was funny. I uh I showed it to some
of the SpaceX folks when we were talking
about Inspiration 4, but yeah. Amazing.
Yeah. Just knocked on the door every now
and then and got lucky in 2020. Um it
was certainly through the approach of
trying to be an investor, but it it
revisited old conversations and moved
very quickly. Kind of funny that a
banker called you from city and that led
to you. Oh, I called the banker. Oh, you
called the banker. They called the
banker trying to get the the a contact
uh like a a recent contact and that's uh
that's that's like hook me up. I want to
get in. That's crazy. Yeah. Okay. So
then you said hey that was a successful
mission. You had obviously a good
relationship with SpaceX and the
operations team there I'm assuming and
you said hey I'd like to come back and
like Polaris dawn was formed at that
time or did that come together later
just for the audience. So last what was
it
September you were the first private
citizen in human history to perform a
spacew walk which again another
incredible moment and you know I think
it was inspiring for people who realized
at that moment that perhaps you didn't
need to become an astronaut to be able
to walk in space. I mean it was really
just incredible. But how did the
continuation go from inspiration 4 to
Polaris dawn? Yeah and I I loved it. I
mean, Plaston was filled with we crammed
so many really incredible objectives in
five days uh on top of about 40 science
experiments. It was an awesome mission.
I'd love to tell you about it. And and
you know, but uh yeah, so when we came
back from Inspiration 4, I thought we
checked the box on every objective. I
mean, we navigated the whole, you know,
billionaire in in space thing, which at
the time with, you know, some of the
other, you know, missions that were
going off was um was attracting a lot of
a lot of heat and really focused it on
trying to to do good in the world that,
you know, we can make progress in space
and try and, you know, make the, you
know, mother earth a better place. And
we focused on raising a lot of money for
St. Jude. And um and anyway, like we did
and we did three days of science and
research experiments. It felt really
good and we were a little bit short on
our uh on our um you know our
fundraising goal for uh St. Jude. I mean
we we set out to raise over $200
million. We wound up raising $250
million but we were a little short and
we came back and I was like man we
almost got everything done and then Elon
sent a tweet right after Splashdown. 40
minutes after Splashdown and he said put
me in for 50 million. And he already had
put in five and we we we exceeded our
goal and I was like man we got
everything done. We set the bar high.
Maybe this is it. And um it was a couple
weeks later that I was invited to go to
Starbase. Uh this was the second time I
went. This was like October of 21. And
we sat down with a number of folks
including Elon. And we talked about, you
know, doing a um like a developmental
program where we actually can build
things and test things that hadn't been
done in a while. And I remember Elon,
he's like, "We we can build a suit. I
know exactly how I would do it. and
let's go up really high, you know, let's
get past the Gemini 11 record, go
farther into space than anyone's gone
since we last walked on the moon because
it's it's different. It's hard and we're
going to learn a lot. And that's what
you need to do when you want to inspire
people is not kind of do the same things
over and over again, but but do things
that are different and build up to an
even grander objective. And I was like,
"All right, I'm totally in." And we
contemplated other missions, you know, a
follow on to Polaris dawn and then the
first crude flight of Starship. But, uh,
the nomination came in and, you know,
had to put my my, uh, fun space career
on hold to to to for an incredible
opportunity to serve the country and
contribute to the world's greatest space
agency. So, let's get into that. How did
the
conversation lead to you becoming the
nominee to administer NASA? Were you in
conversations with Elon first? Is that
how this this kind of began for you? No.
So, and and I think like that's another
thing that, you know, almost every
senator wanted to ask is, you know, you
know, weren't weren't you Elon's guy in
this? Like I I have no doubt. I mean,
look, he he he helped the president win
the election. He he's was in Air Force
One, Marine One. He was at Mara Lago
throughout the campaign. I'm I'm I'm
sure he had inputs. I was getting text
messages from generals that I uh that I
got to know when I built, you know,
helped build that defense company,
Draen. Uh that's where we flew all the
fighter jets and and you know, they were
in now positions of influence and said,
"Would you like to serve in the in the
administration and and it wasn't even
just NASA. I mean, there were roles from
Treasury to uh the department, you know,
to the Air Force." And I was like, I am
honored to contribute anyway. you know,
I've had I've been, you know, relatively
apolitical, but if I've had one
political position that I've been
pounding the table on since I um since I
I was exposed to the defense industry at
Draen, it's the competitiveness of the
nation. And that's because I saw when we
were replicating, you know, enemy
tactics in 2015 in fighter jets, the gap
between our capabilities and the bad
guys was wide. And you felt very
confident and every year it started to
shrink. And it's like, what is going on
here? Why are we paralyzed? Why are we
slowing down while while the Chinese
especially are moving wicked fast? Um,
and I've spoken out about it from time
to time on where I think some of the
problems are and over consolidation of
the defense industry. So anyway, I I was
absolutely honored to have a chance to
serve. I'm sure Elon contributed into
the, you know, was supportive in it, but
it was a number of folks and I got a
call from Howard Lutnick, who was
leading the uh, transition team, and he
did a phone interview and the next thing
you know, like 40 hours later, I was at
Mara Lago. He said, "Hop on a plane.
Come out
here." Having a lot of friends of mine
who are serving in this administration,
your story sounds familiar that folks
that are close to this whole group that
was sitting at Mara Lago for several
weeks and months after the
election. I've heard a lot of similar
stories that folks got called saying,
"Hey, would you like to consider
something?" And it was very open-ended.
It's like we've gotten to know you. We
trust you. You're reliable. But most
importantly, we're looking for folks
that have experience and acumen in
operating a business, in understanding
how to manage at scale, and really have
a similar sort of belief system, I would
say, to the folks that that were
stepping in to run this administration.
So, I I do think what you're saying
sounds like what I've heard and makes a
lot of sense to me. Um, so so you then
fly out to Mara Lago. What was that
like? Oh man, that was so cool. I mean
it just happened so suddenly and I I
mean just you know kind of put together
uh a quick plan. Uh, at that point I
knew it was consideration for NASA
administrator, but I'll tell you in the
days leading up to it, I was hearing
everything from being at the Treasury
Department in various roles and to um,
you know, again to the Department of the
Air Force, but I knew it was NASA and I
was like, well, I got to I got to come
with a plan and uh, and I, you know, we
put together a one pager for the
president and it was a it was a great
interview. I mean, I never really met
him in person. and I shook his hand kind
of once in passing uh 10 plus years
earlier and the president was incredibly
knowledgeable. Um I was impressed. He
knew a lot about the space program which
makes sense. He I mean you know he
helped with commercial crew return
operational capability to the US with
with
Dragon. You know a big push on the
Artemis program created the space force.
He knew a lot he knew a lot about China.
Uh he kn we talked a lot about their air
force actually which I thought was
interesting. some of my my um you know
defense experience and uh it was
incredible. I mean it was an hour plus
long and I um I uh I came away with it
feeling uh you know really good about
the opportunity. Who coached you on your
one page there and what did it say?
Nobody coached me on it. It was it was
just I generally you know I've had an
opportunity to obviously interact with
NASA over the last I mean my my
commercial space career now goes on uh
well it'll be it'll be 5 years in a in a
couple months from when it began. And
you know during Polaris storm when we
were doing suit development spent a lot
of time at NASA using their chambers and
facilities had a lot of you know kind of
firsthand experience certainly Kennedy
Space Center. So I had a good starting
place and uh I think it really just
centered on look in in in this kind of
environment budgets aren't getting
bigger. Uh we do have to do more with
less. The agency is doing a lot of
littles a lot of things that other
agencies departments companies are
capable of doing. That's not why the
taxpayers fund NASA. Like NASA's funded
to do the near impossible that no one
else can do, not things that, you know,
companies should be doing for their own
competitiveness. You know, uh NASA helps
fund like engine efficiency programs for
you know um commercial jet engine
providers. It's like don't they need to
do that themselves or else they lose to
their competitors? Like why are we
funding this? So basically like an idea
to kind of go in stop a lot of the
littles that are not needle movers that
are not why the agency exists and
concentrate on the needle movers. So,
you know, that's leading in the high
ground of space. Uh, let's get let's,
you know, let's complete our our lunar
obligations cuz that's a whole another
story with with China. At the same time,
parallel the the, you know, parallel the
capabilities to get to Mars, help
commercial industry uh, develop the the
rapid reusable heavy lift capability
that allows us to go anywhere, pivot
from competing with industry to doing
what no company would ever do, which is
build nuclear spaceships. There's a lot
of advantages to it. nuclear electric
propulsion for sure. You know, we don't
have to worry as much about refilling.
It's hyperefficient transport of mass.
It opens up, you know, beyond Mars. And
and frankly, like look, it takes the
pressure off insitu resource
manufacturing. And if you are going to
do insitu resource manufacturing, you're
going to need nuclear power. And the
farther we get away from the sun, the
less reliant we are on solar. A lot of
reasons why that should not be a small
program in the lab right now doing light
bulbs, but should be a billion dollar
initiative. you know, figuring out the
space economy and uh increasing the rate
of world changing discovery. Those have
been my priorities. Uh it's what I told
briefed the president. It's what I went
through the Senate and the hearing on.
It's what we would have tried to
concentrate on if I got the job. There's
a lot in there we should
unpack. I want to just get your
perspective on the arc of NASA. You
know, NASA is a storied
institution, inspirational to many.
You and me the same. I still wear a NASA
hat with pride often, but you know, the
agency from an outsers's perspective
feels like it's become a lagard. It
feels like it's kind of lost a little
bit of its luster. Why is that? Do I
have that wrong? And if I don't, what
has happened to the administration of
the agency over the decades that's led
to this this moment? Well, I like you, I
love NASA, and I was so excited to to
contribute. I was honored that the
president nominated me. I mean, you've
got the best and brightest that show up
to work every day and want to win in the
high ground of space and I would have
been thrilled to work alongside him.
You're totally right. Everything about
it, even that just looking at the
insignia, how how damn inspiring it is,
but NASA's got problems and um but
that's that look that's not unique to
them. It's going to be governmentwide.
Whatever I tell you that I think is
wrong with NASA, I would guarantee it,
you know, is uh like, you know, it's
systemic across uh every government
agency and department. Uh the
bureaucracy is super real. No one's
gonna be surprised about that. You know
the you have dozens of layers of
leadership. Everybody's got a deputy. I
mean you know things that you know I
know like you know we know in business
that certainly Elon knows and instills
in his companies across commercial space
like ownership like you push ownership
down to the lowest levels. You empower
the smart people to make good decisions.
You know you give them the tools to make
those good decisions. You hold them
accountable when you get them wrong.
That does not exist inside NASA or the
government. There is so many layers of
management. Everybody's got a deputy.
It's crazy. I would have deleted all
that. Like not that not the people don't
need to go, but they need to, you know,
the the the amount of deputies,
assistants, associate assistant to the
deputy, the amount of committees, the
meetings with 200 people on them, the
review boards, like like all that needs
to go. You need so many more doers. And
there's a lot of them there. They're
really smart, but you you got to push
down uh you know, ownership to the
absolute lowest level. So you you got
this crushing bureaucracy that impedes
progress. And then and here's where
Congress plays a role. Every state's got
some equity that they care about and
they protect like hell and it impedes
the big progress. You know, like I I
tell you, I I love talking to all the
senators and the Senate was so fair to
me and and I know I would have had a lot
of great votes, but you talk to some
senators and they're like, you know, we
have a local rocket club that supports
these schools and NASA contributes it to
every year and I want to make sure that
continues. It's like, well, why can't
you do a car wash for the rocket club?
Like, this isn't huge dollars. Why can't
the community raise those funds? And
then you might say, well, what's wrong
with a couple rocket clubs, you know, to
inspire the kids all across the country?
Well, well, one turns to 10 turns to
thousands, and it becomes a distraction.
Those are parts to delete. Those are
resources that are draining away from
what every senator should care about,
which is how do we get to the moon, get
to Mars, and shock the world with, you
know, with with with world changing
headlines. That's what people are are
waiting for from NASA, you know, 100%. I
mean, man, what you're saying resonates
with me so much. It's not just NASA.
It's across the federal government. I've
spent enough time now interacting with
folks and meeting with folks and hearing
similar stories. It's just the chaos
that that builds with scale, with age,
with bureaucracy, with competing
interests that all have to be met and
you end up diluting everything away.
It's so frustrating to hear that. I
think this does play into um why China
is is really just moving at at lightning
speed right now. They have this immense
second mover advantage that is um that
is crushing across all technology. You
know when you had the Manhattan project
we uh we had the the technical knowhow,
the will and the resources to get
something done and we set up facilities
where we needed them. you know, Oakidge
and Lawrence Liverour and um you know,
like you know, you get um you put the
facilities where you need them and the
talent where you need them to execute on
the mission and everything builds up
logically to it and you and you deliver
a win. And we did the same thing with
the space program, you know, in the in
the in the 1960s. Well, now all of those
national labs and all and really
honestly a lot of the facilities within
NASA are doing lots of little things for
existence. Um and some of them are
relevant to the mission and some are
not. And when you try and do something,
you know, glorious now, you have to try
and repurpose those resources that are
super entrenched and they don't want to
necessarily move. And then, of course,
you have Congress that's protecting
their programs. China is literally doing
what we are do what we did, you know, in
the in the ' 40s and 60s and saying,
we're going to, hey, we're going to go
after fusion, um, or we're going to work
on next generation fifth gen nuclear
reactors. We're going to build sixthgen
fighter jets. And they put the
facilities where they belong with the
right people and resources. There's no
baggage. and they have this incredible
second mover advantage and they're able
to get things done at lightning speeds
because they don't have all that drag
and we have a lot of drag and again it's
not just NASA it's it's governmentwide
and do you think there's a way to fix it
without Congress or is the only way to
fix it without
Congress
meaning there needs to be no Congress if
we have a shot at fixing this and there
needs to be a different governing model.
Yeah. You know, look, I I think the uh I
think this is this is why I I absolutely
support the the president that, you
know, despite all I I mean, I my single
largest political donation ever was to
was to President Trump in this uh you
know, to support his inauguration. It's
why I got charged up with uh you know,
with Elon assembling the Doge team is
like we do have to shrink the
government. We do have to get rid of all
these inefficiencies, these the waste
and the distractions from the mission,
things that we don't need every taxpayer
contributing to and actually concentrate
those dollars, real dollars, on the
things that the taxpayers should be
fighting for. And when you do that, you
know what, like 20 billion or 25 billion
is actually a lot of money. And you
know, and I know like it's it's a super
tough budget environment right now. And
people people hate change, but I'm
always surprised when like a million is
not a million anymore and a billion is
not a billion because you do an awful
awful lot with that. So, if there was
ever a time to get this done, uh it's
now with President Trump with when he
has the House and the Senate behind him
and and I'm not surprised that there is
frustration from from people that were
really passionate um and and and are
still passionate when uh when this much
time goes by and we're not able to get
those things done that we thought we
we'd be able to. So, NASA's budget last
year, $25 billion. Break it down for us.
How is that money being spent?
what are the dimensions upon which you
would kind of categorize that budget?
Um, and we'll talk about kind of what's
going forward.
Yeah, I mean, look, I I think an
incredibly large portion of it is with
human space flight and uh and
specifically uh the Aremis program and
SLS and it's a lot of billions going to
a disposable rocket. It is billions that
when I you're talking so I mean I think
it's like five or 600% overrun to build
the mobile launcher 2 for the next
generation SLS. So sorry just tell us
what SLS is for the audience. That's the
space launch system I think or it's uh
they also call it the Senate launch
system I think and uh it's spread across
um a lot of dollars are spread across
some key states. Well just to give you
an idea so SLS is just repurposed
shuttle hardware. So, uh, and I don't
blame anyone for putting us down this
path because at the time you did not
have Blue Origin or SpaceX or any of
these other commercial companies doing
the things that are doing today, but
they were like, "Let's, uh, let's take
the shuttle program parts and put into a
program called Constellation, and let's
take the Constellation parts and put it
in a program called uh, SLS." And and
essentially, again, it's the it's it's
it's it's the same shuttle motors. It's
the same solid rocket boosters. You're
basically taking the tank and putting
Orion on top of it. Orion is 20 years
old, by the way. It hasn't flown humans
yet. And it's incredibly expensive and
very disposable, but it creates a lot of
jobs in certain states and um and it's
like at some and look, there's enough
hardware now to fly a couple missions
and make sure you beat China back to the
moon. But but you can't be stuck on this
forever. This is literally the
equivalency, by the way, of taking P-51
Mustangs from World War II and using
them in Desert Storm because uh we got
to keep the plants open. And that
obviously makes no no logical sense
whatsoever for factories that are making
this stuff that used to make landing
ships in World War II that made Saturn
rocket that pivoted to shuttle to SLS
and now to believe that you can't make
another pivot is is kind of crazy and
the right thing you should pivot towards
honestly is nuclear. I want to just talk
about the the Trump budget proposal for
NASA. So this is the NASA budget over
the history of NASA. And
the proposed budget would basically
create the lowest budget since
1961. So they're proposing to reduce the
overall budget from 25 billion a year
down to 19 billion a year. Were you part
of the conversation on building this
budget? And then I'll highlight some of
the features of this budget here in a
moment. But did did you um have
conversations with the administration as
this was being put together and some of
these proposals were being considered? I
mean, how how deep have you gone in
this? No, you know, when you're a
nominee, you're actually kept in the
dark on a lot of things. Um you do get
briefed on everything that's going on
with every center, you know, every major
program, things that senators could ask
you about from a um from like a
one-on-one perspective, but you're not
given access to sensitive information.
you almost need some deniability when
you're talking to senators on that or
else your nominations could get held up
really big time. So, I wasn't aware I
honestly uh I was voted out of
committee, you know, uh the commerce
committee by um you know, Senator Cruz
and and you know, 18 other it was 19
senators in total. And the next day, the
skinny budget came out. And if that
skinny budget had come out uh you know
again a day or two earlier I would I
would never have made it out of
committee because obviously as as I
think is playing out right now both
sides of the aisle are not happy about
the you know the budget. Okay. So, in
this budget, there's a proposal to
cancel
SLS and Orion, terminate numerous
robotic science missions, including the
Mars sample return mission. Mhm. Um,
probes to Venus, and several future
space telescopes. And it represents the
White House's desire to end the
development of a nuclear thermal rocket
engine. I guess having scrutinized this
budget, how do you react to what you see
being proposed? And does it solve what
you've identified as some of the
challenges in NASA? Or are those more
management challenges? Does budget
create a constraining force here that
fixes some of the issues with respect to
focus and concentration of capital into
the right projects for from your point
of view? Yeah, it's a it's a it's an
excellent question. So So first, like
look, the the the reduction the big
budget reduction is a great forcing
function for change. And I know there's
a lot of people that probably don't want
to don't want to hear that, but uh it is
true. That doesn't mean I would have
landed at 19 billion in this whole
thing, but I fully support uh the
president and uh with the goal of
shrinking the budget and and and and
getting back to responsible footing and
I do think billions can go a very long
way. So uh I will just start with that.
I I everything you just said
directionally is is is kind of in the
right direction. We've already got paid
for enough SLS hardware that if you were
to terminate for convenience now, you
got enough to launch like two or three
of them. It's enough to get you back to
the moon, check that box to make sure
that you don't have any economic or
scientific or national security reasons
to stay on the moon and and put your
energy much more towards um commercial
industry. Look, nuclear thermal uh
propulsion I'm not a fan of. I like
nuclear electric. Nuclear thermal to
test it, you're spewing radioactive
debris here on Earth. It's not going to
go over well to anyone and it doesn't
really solve your refueling problem. you
still need to top it off with hydrogen
in space if you want a reusable space
plug. So I don't like that either. And
and it's subscale. It's it's a fact.
It's a program that sits in a lab
forever. Like what you need in nuclear
electric I'm passionate on the subject
is you you need us to get back to the
good old days. Like we went from the
atomic bomb in 1945 to laying the keel
on the nautilus in 1951. Five six years.
We didn't keep it in a lab forever. We
said, you know what, we're going to do
big bold things. And that's what we need
to be doing with uh in space with when
it comes to uh to nuclear. Look, a lot
of the science programs I'm huge fans of
Mars sample return. The best thing to do
is when the astronauts get there to
bring the samples home. Why would we
spend billions to send a robotic
mission? We can put that into commercial
industry and accelerate their timeline.
So, I'm not I I wasn't a fan of a pure
robotic mission on that one. And you
know, a lot of the big science programs
I want to see James Webs and Hubble
telescope programs launching annually,
if not more. Um, flagship programs
definitionally are billion dollar spends
and if you spend a billion then you got
to get it right and that means lots of
requirements and and and we can't take
unnecessary risk and a billion becomes a
three billion program and it's never on
time. Like we should be challenging the
best and brightest. Give me 10 $100
million missions a year. Let's try that
and let's accept that three fail and get
act you know I was going to introduce
like time to science as a KPI like how
why don't why do we accept things taking
10 years when they could be a year even
the decal process of of prioritizing
scientific missions over a 10-year span
is kind of insane 100% 100% and I I
think a lot of people hear budget cuts
and I I hear this on the NIH side as
well now that the administration and
budget cutting is going to take lives
people going lose lives. We're going to
lose science. This is an anti-science
agenda. But the if you can get more
efficient with how you deploy capital
and how you manage the deployment of
that capital and the utilization of that
capital, you actually accelerate
science. You accelerate outcomes and you
improve the condition and the prosperity
for humanity and for America. And it's
completely a misdirected statement when
people say that a budget cut is an
anti-science movement. It's about
finding the right places so that you get
more outcomes and redeploy in a smarter,
more efficient way. It drives me nuts. I
just see it, you know, all over uh right
now. That's just I mean it's just
politics. I do think overfunding leads
to complacency, leads to bureaucracy,
which actually leads to a slowdown in
discovery, a slowdown in invention, a
slowdown in progress. Anyway, I'm sorry
for my rant. I agree. Look, as I mean,
as entrepreneurs, we know like some of
our probably best decision-m is always
when we were running low on cash. So,
um, you know, it kind of drives
efficiency and, uh, it is a, you know,
necessity, mother of all invention
there. Yeah. Look, I think that's just a
product of some of our and I'm not
familiar with any of the NIH or and I'm
I'm not pretending to go deep on that at
all. Just I do think this is kind of a
product of of of the politics of our
time. It's a very divided country. You
know, people have to take an opposing
view and and and go to extremes. People
will die over over this. But the
government is terrible capital
allocators. Come on. We should all know
that. And you know we should as
taxpayers we should be contributing to
the things that no one else is willing
to do where there is no good business
use case or or economic model you know
it is in you know if competition is
working they can solve a lot of problems
and we should put our energy to what
they won't solve. Um and and look I
think Katzios by the way in science he's
a great leader. I I've spoken to him a
bunch of times. Um you know he he's not
a quag. He doesn't think wild things
like that. He he wants you know the
golden age of science and discovery. I'm
fair. Yeah. Good science. Yeah.
Absolutely. Well, let's talk about
Artemis. I think this is a big piece
that that the American public doesn't
fully gro that we have this effort and
maybe you can just lay out for us the
case for Artemis. Lay out for us the
case for Mars. Tell us about the
relationship between the two and the
timelines. Sure. And why Yeah. Why are
we doing them? Let's just say I I am in
the return to the moon camp. doesn't
mean like uh you know I and I'm I know
that you know Elon is very focused on on
Mars and he has a lot of great reasons
why including just the survival of our
species. I mean the long term it is the
right move. I remember um during my
hearing uh one senator was really
grilling me a lot of like what really
what's the difference between you know
moon and Mars and uh you know isn't
moons a stepping stone. I'm like well
one's a planet you know and uh you know
it has an atmosphere and if you looked
at the moon it doesn't look pretty. I
mean, it's getting beat up all the time.
It has no protection from, you know,
from solar radiation. So, reality is
like you should go to the moon if it
because for 35 years we said we were
going to. And I think that's very
important. You know, we it's it's it's
very late in the game to say, well, we
did it in the 60s and early 70s. You
know, that would have been the fine
position to state the entire time that
we've done it and we're moving on. But
we didn't. For 35 years, we said we're
going back and we spent over a hundred
billion of taxpayer dollars saying we
were going to do it. And for us not to
be able to do it now and watch China do
it. Like I said, it's it signals a far
greater disease across our our
government and and how our system
operates. And I don't think we want that
reckoning. So look, we paid for the
hardware anyway. We let's let's go back,
but let's parallel going to Mars. So
that's what Artemis is really about. I
mean, you can say Artemis is about Mars,
too, but that's like 100 years down the
line. And like I said, it's a giant
disposable rocket program that
repurposes shuttle hardware. It's
incredibly expensive. We signed up a lot
of international partners to support it
because we like collecting flags. Um,
and it doesn't necessarily always mean
that what they're contributing to is in
the best interest of the program. Case
in point, you know, we had, you know,
gateway man like this is going down a
rabbit hole of a lot of things because
of the shortcomings of the vehicle, but
it's expensive. It's disposable. it is
not the way to do uh affordable,
repeatable, efficient exploration
whether it's to moon, Mars or anywhere
else. So let's get it done and then
focus on the on the right way to go
about doing this so that we're not
seeing people walk on the moon every 5
years or something crazy that it's
happening all the time which is what we
get excited about. What is there to do
on the moon? Why should we go back? What
is the purpose? I think, you know, it's
it's it's almost like a, you know, if
you're going to go and commit yourself
uh take risks in a in a conflict, you
know, you want clear objectives. And in
my mind, again, aside from the fact that
the hardware is already essentially
purchased, it's clear objectives. Is
there any economic, scientific, or
national security reasons to be here?
And I don't think we can say that
conclusively right now that that there
are none. and China is going uh and if
they were to find something even a small
probability a 1% let's just say
hypothetically it's helium 3 and and
they're going to usher in a new form of
power. Think about how many conflicts
that we've had over the last century
over uh over sources of power over
energy. Do we want to get that one
wrong? And and are we willing to take a
1% chance and and that could shift the
balance of power here on Earth? I don't
think so. And we said we were going to
do it for 35 years and we and we spent
100 billion of taxpayer money. Like I
said, the hardware is there. But I think
you do it. You make those
determinations. Is there scientific,
economic or national security reason to
be here? And if not, you move on. And if
companies like Blue Origin and SpaceX
and even Rocket Lab are successful with
their vehicles, you're going to have
like the optionality to go to the moon.
It's not the Delta V is a negligible
difference between whether you're going
to the moon or Mars. And we should
colonize Mars. We should build a colony
on Mars. I think we need to go there. Um
and by going there it is a it is the
first step on a far grander journey you
know and uh you know I I I you know Elon
is obviously very passionate about it
occupy Mars like he knows it's not the
perfect destination there's nothing like
you can you know it's unlike anything in
in Earth's history you know people say
it's analoges to you know the explorers
of the 1400s or putting people in like
those shipping containers for six months
and saying we know how to live on Mars
it's you know you could work
your whole life on Mars and you still
live in a bubble
You know, so it's not like it's not
going to be an easy way of life, but it
is a step in the right direction. Like
our destiny is out and among the stars.
Like we will inevitably learn something
out there that's going to change our
thinking and we it's going to it's going
to create a a craving for that knowledge
and we are going to want to continue to
go out and explore and learn even more.
Mars is the best stop first step on that
journey. So, let's talk about getting
there and achieving some of the other
missions that we might have as a
country, as a
species, and the relationship with
private
industry. Elon believes he can get
payload into orbit for $10 per kilogram
with the Starship platform, which is,
call it a roughly 100x reduction in
cost. Yeah. Um maybe more. Maybe from
some from a depending on the point at
which you're measuring it, maybe a
thousandx reduction in cost. And that
unlocks the potential to do these things
in an economically viable way. Going to
the moon, going to
Mars.
Why shouldn't NASA be more fully
embracing of this private industry
capability? Is it because it's Elon or
is it because it reduces money going to
defense contractors? What is the
motivation against going all in on this
company SpaceX or companies like it that
have built these competencies that would
have been unfathomable just a few
decades ago but are real here today? Oh,
this is such a a deep conversation. Uh
so, um look, I I one thing I'd say is
like I obviously I love SpaceX and they
safely put me into space twice on two
awesome missions, brought me home and
I'm cheering them on. I I'm I'm happy
what SpaceX is doing. I'm thrilled about
the investments that Blue Origin's
doing, that Rocket Lab is doing, you
know, uh Firefly. So, it's a look, we
have a great industry. So, the broader
question is just why isn't why isn't
NASA leaning more into commercial? Well,
look, it's NASA's foresight that gave
birth to the commercial crew program
that enabled even me to go to space. So,
like they are thinking in that
direction, but there are politics in
play. The nice thing is is those winds
are shifting uh throughout my you know,
whole confirmation process. you know,
you are educated heavily by some very
smart political folks. Uh they sherpa
you around every senator and they were
like, look, the, you know, a year ago,
two years ago, the idea of talking to
senators that are in SLS states and
convincing them we need to be looking a
little bit more to the future with
commercial and maybe pivoting to things
like nuclear propulsion would be a
non-starter. And I'll tell you, they
were very reasonable. uh all of them
were very reasonable that they know that
you're you know this this rocket built
on 60-y old technology that's $4.5
billion a launch has an expiration date.
So I do think like that ship is turning.
It's just this isn't like a this isn't a
speedboat. The government, you know,
it's a it's turning like it's a giant,
you know, shipping container. It turns a
half a degree like a year and uh and
that's not obviously fast enough for a
lot of us. Um but I would say it's
moving in that uh that direction. And
then NASA also has to, you know,
repurpose its resources on things that a
SpaceX or Blue Origin won't do. They're
not going to put a rock, they're not
going to build a nuclear reactor and
launch it. Uh you're not going to get
the indemnities for that. Even shipping
highlyenriched uranium is a nightmare.
That is what the government should be
doing. Like so NASA should be doing what
the commercial industries can't. And
that by the way takes so much stress off
a company like SpaceX trying to get to
Mars. Like if you can minimize the
number of space-based refueling or the
insitu resource manufacturing, look,
even when a starship gets to Mars,
you're betting on like you know a 100
consecutive miracles happening to top to
mine propellant there and bring it back.
NASA should be helping. The government
should be helping with that because it
it creates a lot of other optionality.
We can have you know nuclear battle
stars in lower Earth orbit um you know
as part of uh Golden Dome. There's a lot
of reasons why you know it's not all
SpaceX all commercial versus NASA. both
totally. So just to compare last week
Space Epoch, a Chinese rocket company
completed its first sea recovery test.
So much like we saw a few years ago with
SpaceX, they had a vertical launch and
they landed back in the ocean about 125
second flight. The key question a lot of
folks are now asking, has China caught
up? Is this a space race? Why does it
matter? Because isn't space big enough
for everyone?
I mean the space is the ultimate high
ground and the high ground has mattered
you know it's had tactical and strategic
significance since like the beginning of
humankind. It matters. I was grateful to
have the opportunity to lead you know
the peaceful exploration uh of space but
it's not all peaceful like we we we
can't be naive to the fact that it has
been
weaponized and you know China leading in
this domain makes a difference. Um there
are things of scientific and economic
and again national security value out
there and we we can't we have to lead we
can't fall behind. If we fall behind we
may never catch up. So and I am
concerned about that uh you know China
moving closer to reusability. They
launch the second most uh orbital
rockets every year without reusability.
Uh you know thank goodness for for
SpaceX or or we definitely be already
behind in that regard. So um I am
concerned about it. It it it honestly it
is a race and like yeah we we the domain
is vitally important we can't fall
behind. So that gives them the high
ground with respect to weapons systems
with respect to observational platforms
sensors etc. Right. Yeah. Okay. So so
let's talk a little bit about your
nomination. You seem I would give you my
vote. You should be the administrator of
NASA. It would be amazing. Um thanks.
You testified in front of the Senate
committee on April 9th. I think it was a
19 to9 vote to move you out of
committee. Yes. Then there were reports
going into this weekend that you were
going to
be voted on by the full Senate this week
and the estimates were you were going to
get 70 confirmation votes or that was
some news report I had read. So it seems
like you were going to fly right through
and administer NASA. Um so then what
happened? So I I mean I got a call um
Friday of last week that um you know the
uh the president has decided to go into
a uh go in a different direction. Uh it
was a um uh it was a real bummer and I
uh I know like a number of parties in
government need to be notified of that
which um you know I expected to kind of
have just a peaceful weekend and the
next thing I knew on Saturday you know
it was uh there was a lot of activity on
the internet but maybe that's just like
my perspective cuz I follow space uh and
and such but it was certainly uh you
know disappointing but uh you know the
president needs to have you know his
person that you know he counts on to to
fulfill the agenda And
um yeah, I uh the person that called
you, what was what did they tell you was
the reason the president was withdrawing
his nomination? Uh just said the
president had decided to go in a
different direction. We all serve at the
pleasure of the president. Um now I mean
I started to get some more details as it
went on. I honestly also like I'm not
like I don't like play dumb on this. I I
had a pretty good idea of um you know
that um you know I don't think that the
timing was much of a coincidence uh that
you know there was other changes going
on the same day and uh you know it was
kind of uh obviously a little bit of a a
disappointment. So are you referring to
Elon?
I I just you know there was uh obviously
there was more than more than one you
know departure that was covered on that
day and um it became uh you know at
least from what I what I've heard that
it was uh there was a um you know there
was and I'm just you know I read the
news same as everybody else but I you
know had obviously was in the in DC for
the last 6 months getting ready that you
know there were some people that um you
know that had some axes to grind I guess
and uh and I was a a good visible
uh target. I know that like the the news
talks a lot about like that, you know,
Democratic donations is the cause. Um
that was not a new development. You just
Google, you can they're all public. The
New York Times published an article
saying that President Trump knew about
your Democratic donations in the past
when you received the nomination. So
that was actually not news according to
the New York Times that that was well
understood, well covered. So kind of put
the kibos on that explanation. So what
are the axis to grind or the access to
grind with Elon? Are there kind of two
factions? Whatever you can kind of
provide some color on, I think it would
be really helpful to understand because
there's a lot of speculation going on
right now and I would say some folks are
really disappointed in some of the
transitions that are taking place and
some folks are really trying to grock it
and understand it. So anything you can
do to help folks understand would be,
you know, I think helpful. You know,
first I just I want to be overwhelmingly
clear. I I I don't fault the the
president at all. I fully support him
that you know the president of the
United States you know the leader of the
free world makes a thousand decisions a
day with seconds of information. He's
got to get a lot more right than wrong.
Um so I don't I mean you know I don't
blame you know an influential adviser
coming in and saying look here's the
facts and I think we should kill this
guy and the president's got to make a
call and move on. Um I think that's
exactly uh you know kind of how it went.
Um it was not the Senate at all. Uh you
don't get floor time by the way. uh you
know there's a hundred nominees that are
like waiting for floor time. The only
way you get floor time is when a lot of
senators you know call Senator Thoon and
say this is our guy and we got to move
him along. That's how you know it's like
a high you're going to get a high vote
count. So the Senate was very fair,
really nice. I I enjoyed that
experience. I you know I think you you
got one person um and I don't know the
history on like what the trigger was or
wasn't but um you know decided to to
kind of make a move and again I don't
fault the president for it at all but
you know look in in in terms of
donations I I've always been you know
somewhat of a moderate I actually like I
am like a right leaning I I I do support
you know the president's agenda that's
why I made as big of a donation as I did
to his cause. Let me just ask for
clarity. Yeah. Sorry. Go ahead. I was
just going to say like when you fill out
your questionnaire for the Senate
committee, which is public, it asks you
to list every donation. Before you go in
front of a single senator, before you do
a hearing, you do these um prep sessions
at the White House where people pretend
to be senators and they prep you on the
donation question. So like that wasn't
new news. Might have been new to the
president at that, you know, might have
refreshed his memory perhaps, but uh
that I don't I don't think that was the
cause. I think the media has got it
pretty accurate.
So, was this a shot at Elon by someone
that is anti- Elon?
I mean, you know, people can draw their
their own conclusions, but I I think the
direction that people are going is um or
thinking on this seems seems to check
out to me. And what is the root of that?
Is it vested interest in spending that
Elon is advocating gets cut? Is it
diametrically opposed philosophical
points of view on the role of
government? What is the root anti- Elon
sentiment?
that is kind of on the other side of the
equation here. Do you think I mean I
think that the uh the people
overwhelmingly voted for the president
to go in and shrink the government and
bring about change and get rid of fraud,
waste and abuse of which I am a
thousand% behind the president and I I
believe that that's what you know Elon
and Doge was working towards. But people
also hate change. Like we all know this
and um you know people can uh be very
protective of their empire and you know
when somebody comes in you know Elon's
got a playbook and I think he knows how
to get things done. And I and I I think
you know in a lot of respects that um
that rub some people or you know what I
think that was one of you know or um had
some axes to grind. I don't know. And uh
and um you know we're just waiting. I I
I don't I you know I don't want to
speculate on all this but yeah. No, I
mean, um, I think that that you've said
enough and I I
guess you've seen the tweets from Elon
today where he was pretty negative about
the House bill that is being labeled the
big beautiful bill, making the case that
it's actually going to drive up a
government deficit to over two trillion,
two half trillion dollars a year. It
doesn't make deep enough cuts. There's a
lot of pork in there, a lot of wasteful
spending in there. And then the House
Speaker today responded to Elon saying,
"Hey, we've still got a recision bill
coming. We've still got an appropriation
bill coming where we're going to start
to fix the budget." But clearly Elon is
now getting vocal about his point of
view on this. Have you spoken with him
at all about what's going on and
government spending and his kind of take
on things as he's walked out of the
office there? Well, you know, as you
know, I kind of mentioned, I told the
Senate, too, like I've only spoken to
Elon, you know, I don't know, a couple
dozen times, most of which related to
human space flight missions, but when I
was talking to him towards the end of
last year, it it was all on government
efficiency related programs. And I think
Elon got a lot of people excited about
Doge u by making like one simple point.
The interest rate on the national debt
exceeds, you know, the DoD budget.
that's scary and it's getting worse and
we can't spend our way out of this
problem. Um, which we've grown a habit
to doing and I know he's very passionate
about it and um, you know, he sacrificed
a lot along with all the others you know
at Doge to try and bring about some
significant you know spending cuts and
then you know to see a bill come in you
know uh whatever 1,200 pages or so that
you know adds you know to the deficit I
think was pretty you know pretty
disheartening. Uh I suspect I mean I'm
not I'm not um you know I'm not in this
uh in this fight and I think like trying
to codify like you know a handful of
billions in cuts probably is you know a
drop in the in the bucket. So I can't
imagine that's too exciting.
You think he's going to get more vocal?
I I I don't I wouldn't presume to know
what goes on through his mind. Like I
said, I think he spends a lot of time
trying to solve a lot of world's
problems and and a problem for this
country and I think a lot of people
agree with it is that the um you know
this national debt is just getting way
out of hand. I mean, this has been my
case for about four years that if we
don't fix this, it eventually becomes an
intractable death spiral. And uh when
that happens, all of the wrangling we're
doing over budget, priorities, programs,
interests,
jobs are no longer
possible. It's like you're trying to
rearrange the deck chairs on the
Titanic. You don't get the choice of
what programs to fund when there is no
funding. And that's the unfortunate
iceberg we're running into. Do you think
Doge is dead? Any point of view on that?
I mean, it was interesting. You know,
obviously there was kind of the grand
exit uh this past week and then I don't
know, at least in my Twitter feed, I try
and follow a lot of the cabinet
secretaries. You know, they were all
coming out and saying, you know, Doge is
alive and well embedded inside the I you
know, I think it was more implying that
like, you know, we're going to clean
house. We're going to take care of our
own house as opposed to letting other
people help us do it. Problem is, like
we haven't been very successful at that
historically. So, I suspect going into
the midterms, people don't want to, you
know, let the other side be pounding the
table on Doge. So, I I don't know. I
mean, I look, I was I've been an
outsider nominee, so I have no idea how
it'll play out, but I I I I think that
some I imagine some people in the
government want to see it go quiet late
in the
night. Is there a deep state? And does
the deep state's like, is it too big to
break? You know, I don't I don't I don't
like know what I would classify a deep
state or not. Like there are there are
there is an absolutely bloated
bureaucracy that uh hates change uh gets
very entrenched that is happy to ride
out uh political appointees like you
know what you're gone in three four
years or you know you're or dead before
you even arrive in my case uh we'll wait
you out. So, I think there's some of
that uh and then I think there's some of
that in with actual, you know, uh
politicians and political appointees
that um uh advocate like hell for the
status quo. And some of it might be good
intended because they're just afraid of
what comes next. And you know, why um
why take a risk when you've got
something right now that supposedly
works? And I ask like, you know, what
what if that what if that comes at the
competitiveness of the nation and our
economic security? What if we get it
wrong because you weren't willing to
take some risk and and make changes? Um,
so I don't think they're necessarily all
evil, by the way. I just think some
people get very comfortable in the
status quo.
Are you going to go back to space?
I um I don't know. You know, this is
like the first time in 26 years that
I've been, you know, really kind of out
of work. Uh I'm sure I'm definitely
going to go back and help Shafor. I
won't ever rob my CEO of his
well-deserved, you know, title now. I
I'll probably be an exec chair or
something. And, you know, I got to work.
I got to have a mission. Um, but I'll
find something to to contribute to. And
man, I I love uh I love flying and I
love space and I like the philanthropic
efforts we've been doing with St. Jude.
So, I'll keep busy. Amazing. Well, look,
you're you've been, if nothing, Jared,
an inspiration to many. Uh, I appreciate
your commitment to service, your
commitment to charity, your commitment
to discovery, and uh, I want to thank
you for the time today. It's been really
great talking with you. Thank you. Oh,
thank you. I, uh, I appreciate having
the opportunity to chat.
[Music]
Ask follow-up questions or revisit key timestamps.
Loading summary...
Videos recently processed by our community