Comments on: A step forward on the NASA budget

By: Space Politics » Committee approves NASA budget

Space Politics » Committee approves NASA budget — Fri, 13 Jul 2007 11:24:31 +0000

[…] few details about the spending bill have been released yet, the bill approved by the full committee appears largely identical to what the CJS subcommittee approved last month. Rep. Dave Weldon (R-FL) is taking credit for one amendment, though, that requires NASA to […]

By: Space Politics » House Appropriations hearing today

Space Politics » House Appropriations hearing today — Thu, 12 Jul 2007 11:51:23 +0000

[…] is scheduled to meet today to markup the Commerce, Justice, and Science appropriations bill that the CJS subcommittee approved last month. The subcommittee version gave NASA about $300 million more than what the White House requested, […]

By: Space Politics » Senate boosts NASA funding, but no miracle yet

Space Politics » Senate boosts NASA funding, but no miracle yet — Wed, 27 Jun 2007 00:39:58 +0000

[…] News (subscription required), about $150 million more than what the administration requested but about $150 million less than what their House counterparts approved earlier this month. Full details about the budget aren’t available yet, but it appears that most of the increase […]

By: anonymous

anonymous — Tue, 19 Jun 2007 05:27:23 +0000

Along with Obey and the Senate, it looks like a Presidential veto is in play for the spending bill that funds NASA this year:

http://townhall.com/columnists/RobertDNovak/2007/06/18/bushs_veto_strategy

It’s going to be one, hard, long slog…

By: Space Politics » Distractions and the NASA budget

Space Politics » Distractions and the NASA budget — Mon, 18 Jun 2007 10:38:43 +0000

[…] take up the Commerce, Justice, Science appropriations bill, the one that includes funding for NASA. The subcommittee added about $300 million to the agency’s overall total in its markup hearing …, although it transferred some money from space operations (shuttle and station) to aeronautics, […]

By: cIclops

cIclops — Thu, 14 Jun 2007 21:14:46 +0000

290 million steps forward and 670 million back.

By: D. messier

D. messier — Thu, 14 Jun 2007 04:33:06 +0000

Mark Chandler wrote:

Maybe itâ€™s just a recognition of the fact that much of the gutting of science and science education at NASA has been politically motivated by the administrationâ€™s dislike of the generally environmentally friendly nature of much of NASAâ€™s earth science initiatives.

Yeah. Seems like an effort to try to restore some of the programs. At at least stop any further damage. Congress is (in theory) a co-equal branch of government and it has priorities of its own. Bush is seldom interested in acknowledging this or accommodating their interests, particularly when Congress is run by the opposition party.

By: al Fansome

al Fansome — Thu, 14 Jun 2007 04:13:25 +0000

I think NASA’s legislative affairs team has exceeded expectations, and they are probably celebrating this one battle.

ESMD is not out of the woods yet.

I am wondering what Obey will do at the full committee level, as well as what floor amendments might come up. This is an odd political year, and something could easily come out of left field.

It will also be interesting to see what comes out of Senate Approps under Mikulski.

– Al

By: Anaxagoras

Anaxagoras — Thu, 14 Jun 2007 00:00:57 +0000

It’s true that prohibiting any funding of a humans-to-Mars program does not have much practical impact at the moment, since such a project is only being discussed as something that might be done after the return to the Moon. Still, it reflects a disturbing attitude among many legislators, the most important being Representative Obey.

I have heard that Rep. Lampson was circulating a letter to be signed by fellow Democrats, asking Obey to ease up on his opposition to manned spaceflight. Anyone else heard of this?

By: Stephen Metschan

Stephen Metschan — Wed, 13 Jun 2007 22:40:08 +0000

Anonymous wrote:

“Re: Exploration â€” the presidentâ€™s â€˜08 request includes a substantial increase for ESMD over both the requested â€˜07 level and the actual (lower) enacted level. So what this means is that House appropriators are willing to let NASA continue to shift a larger share of its budget to Orion, Ares and the Moon-oriented programs. That said, this mark â€” which can stil be undone at the full committee level next week â€” is pretty decent.”

Understood, but arenâ€™t the NASA committees generally pro-NASA? It seems itâ€™s the current House and Senate Leadership isnâ€™t all that excited about going back to the Moon.