<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Gordon warns of appropriations &#8220;mischief&#8221;</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.spacepolitics.com/2007/04/07/gordon-warns-of-appropriations-mischief/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.spacepolitics.com/2007/04/07/gordon-warns-of-appropriations-mischief/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=gordon-warns-of-appropriations-mischief</link>
	<description>Because sometimes the most important orbit is the Beltway...</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 17 Sep 2014 13:35:41 +0000</lastBuildDate>
		<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
		<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=4.0.38</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Donald F. Robertson</title>
		<link>http://www.spacepolitics.com/2007/04/07/gordon-warns-of-appropriations-mischief/#comment-11381</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Donald F. Robertson]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 09 Apr 2007 17:55:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.spacepolitics.com/2007/04/07/gordon-warns-of-appropriations-mischief/#comment-11381</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Jeff:  &lt;i&gt;One wonders, though, whether Democrats would be more willing to support it if the president spent more time talking about it, and thus more clearly was identified with itâ€”especially given current opinions about the president on Capitol Hill these days&lt;/i&gt;

I agree with Jeff&#039;s implication here.  The VSE is far better off staying out of the news than becoming a political football between the Administration and Congress.  This envrionmentalist fears that Congressional efforts to score environmental points are just as likely and potentially damaging.

-- Donald]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jeff:  <i>One wonders, though, whether Democrats would be more willing to support it if the president spent more time talking about it, and thus more clearly was identified with itâ€”especially given current opinions about the president on Capitol Hill these days</i></p>
<p>I agree with Jeff&#8217;s implication here.  The VSE is far better off staying out of the news than becoming a political football between the Administration and Congress.  This envrionmentalist fears that Congressional efforts to score environmental points are just as likely and potentially damaging.</p>
<p>&#8212; Donald</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: al Fansome</title>
		<link>http://www.spacepolitics.com/2007/04/07/gordon-warns-of-appropriations-mischief/#comment-11278</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[al Fansome]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 08 Apr 2007 16:20:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.spacepolitics.com/2007/04/07/gordon-warns-of-appropriations-mischief/#comment-11278</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Jeff,

Since you are bringing up â€œpolitical tacticsâ€ and the NASA budget, note the press release that Chairman Gordon sent out on Friday on Climate Change.

http://science.house.gov/press/PRArticle.aspx?NewsID=1762

The FULL House Science &amp; Technology Committee will have a hearing on this subject on April 17th.

I predict that whatever NASAâ€™s top line is (which will almost certainly come in below the Presidentâ€™s request) the % of NASAâ€™s budget dedicated to Exploration will also take a cut. One of the big winners will be â€œEarth scienceâ€, and GSFC.

In the Senate, Mikulski will probably just â€œmake it soâ€.

The House might take a different route. Will the Democrats intentionally wait until the NASA budget goes to the House floor, to propose an amendment â€” taking money from Ares 1 &amp; Orion, and giving it to Earth science â€” in the hopes that the Republicans would fight against Earth science in full public view?

Assuming the Dems think this is a political winner in 08 â€” a â€œwedge issueâ€ that gives heart burn to (and divides) the Republicans â€” they just might do this.

This is probably just a little bit too sly, but it would be an interesting political tactic.

- Al]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jeff,</p>
<p>Since you are bringing up â€œpolitical tacticsâ€ and the NASA budget, note the press release that Chairman Gordon sent out on Friday on Climate Change.</p>
<p><a href="http://science.house.gov/press/PRArticle.aspx?NewsID=1762" rel="nofollow">http://science.house.gov/press/PRArticle.aspx?NewsID=1762</a></p>
<p>The FULL House Science &amp; Technology Committee will have a hearing on this subject on April 17th.</p>
<p>I predict that whatever NASAâ€™s top line is (which will almost certainly come in below the Presidentâ€™s request) the % of NASAâ€™s budget dedicated to Exploration will also take a cut. One of the big winners will be â€œEarth scienceâ€, and GSFC.</p>
<p>In the Senate, Mikulski will probably just â€œmake it soâ€.</p>
<p>The House might take a different route. Will the Democrats intentionally wait until the NASA budget goes to the House floor, to propose an amendment â€” taking money from Ares 1 &amp; Orion, and giving it to Earth science â€” in the hopes that the Republicans would fight against Earth science in full public view?</p>
<p>Assuming the Dems think this is a political winner in 08 â€” a â€œwedge issueâ€ that gives heart burn to (and divides) the Republicans â€” they just might do this.</p>
<p>This is probably just a little bit too sly, but it would be an interesting political tactic.</p>
<p>&#8211; Al</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
