Appropriations subcommittee Democrats

The minority leadership of the House Appropriations Committee has announced its assignments of Democratic members to the new subcommittee structure. (This assignment took place last week; I had missed it before now.) The Democratic members of the Science, State, Justice, and Commerce subcommittee, the new subcommittee whose jurisdiction includes NASA, are:

Mollohan, previously the ranking Democrat on the VA-HUD subcommittee, will be the ranking member of this new subcommittee as well. Cramer, who had previously announced his assignment to this subcommittee, represents NASA MSFC, while Mollohan’s district includes NASA’s little-known Independent Verification and Validation Facility.

6 comments to Appropriations subcommittee Democrats

  • Chris Martel

    I am trying to find the voting records of these people. has a lot but no data on space policy issues. Does anyone know where I can find such data?

  • Mr. Walker

    I pray Mr. Cramer conducts himself in a manner benefitting the entire space program. I fear he will be myopic and only work in the interests of MSFC.

  • Jeff Foust


    There are very few votes on the floor of the House that deal specifically with NASA or space policy in general. For example, the NASA budget is incorporated into a larger appropriations bill, which in turn has often been rolled into a larger omnibus budget bill. As a result, members of Congress don’t have much a voting record one way or another on space issues.

    If you’re really curious about these members’ positions on space (if, in fact, they have given much thought to the subject), you can always contact their offices, especially if you’re a constituent.

  • Chris Martel

    Thanks Jeff. Do you have any idea how these people voted on HR 5382?

  • Dan Schrimpsher

    Accouring to the House’s web site, Cramer voted yeah. The other Reps should be in there as well.

  • Jeff Foust

    I would caution that how the members of the subcommittee voted on HR 5382 is not necessarily indicative of their position on NASA funding. 5382 was a regulatory bill, not an appropriations measure, and had little, if anything, to do with NASA. (Some might stretch the point and argue that there’s an intersection between 5382’s promotion of commercial spaceflight with the potential for a growing role for commercial ventures in NASA, but that would probably be reading too much into too few tea leaves.)