They're both about ~$500M, and are intended as foundational missions for more intensive exploration.
> The Venus missions actually make either icy giant missions less likely, sadly
So one thing that's good about the new administration is that they've indicated interest in expanding funding for planetary science + exploration. Especially with international partners.
This interest is likely to be a hedge against China.
> Outer planet missions are super expensive and the next launch window is in the early 2030s so time is actually running out.
There is some good news here; JUICE, Europa Clipper and another mission that's slipping my mind. The Europa mission in particular is a prestige mission and has been actively lobbied for a while. So it's going to be interesting how that turns out.
On the whole, not sure how deeply you follow the politics of this, it all depends on what the focus of the next decadal is, https://www.nationalacademies.org/our-work/planetary-science...
I'm hoping that Neptune is on the list.
> a return to Neptune
I've got a whole rant on Neptune. Mostly because I think its temperature anomaly might be one of the most significant scientific questions of our time.
What I personally want to see in my lifetime is a return to Neptune and Uranus. I don’t believe we’ve been to either since Voyager. Given such a mission takes the right planetary alignment, a decade of prep and still a decade to get there this will take awhile.
The Venus missions actually make either icy giant missions less likely, sadly. Outer planet missions are super expensive and the next launch window is in the early 2030s so time is actually running out.