The good news for supporters of NASA is that the Science, State, Justice, and Commerce subcommittee of the House Appropriations Committee provided effectively full funding for NASA when it approved a FY2006 appropriations bill Tuesday. In fact, it added $15 million to the President’s request, a far cry from the sharp cuts the subcommittee proposed last year in the FY05 budget. According to a committee press release, the subcommittee provided full funding for the shuttle program, added $40 million for NASA science programs, and restored funding for NASA’s aeronautics programs to the FY05 level of $906 million, $54 million that what Bush requested.
The bad news becomes evident once one does the math above. Adding $94 million to aeronautics and science programs, but increasing the overall NASA budget by $15 million, means that there’s a net $79 million of cuts to other NASA programs, not specified in the press release. Space News (subscription required) picked up on this as well, but a House Appropriations Committee spokesman was not able to provide details on where those cuts were made.
Good news apparently. How much influence did Griffin have in shaping this budget?
The cuts can come from the one category that can easily give up funds: Future research onboard the space station.
Wow, I agree with Greg! That is a suprise….
Unfortunatly its not likely all the cuts will be from future research. Hutchinson would be against it as part of the “national LAb” desgination she wants for the space station. So who looses out and do they get a gain? Johnson is the main looser as IIRC they do the effects of long duration spaceflight research, but they do gain a lot in other programs.
Science programs gained but also lost? I just do not see it. Maybe its congrees talk for gains when there really wasn’t much of one.
With the talk of troubles with the JWST that may be a casulty. Which long term i don’t mind too much as if we get cheaper launch capibilities, we may still have it up with a small delay and at full compacity at same or lower cost.