Comments on: NASA funding (mostly) survives Senate stimulus compromise

By: Space Politics » NASA stimulus funding update

Space Politics » NASA stimulus funding update — Tue, 10 Feb 2009 03:22:02 +0000

[…] evenly across science, aeronautics, human spaceflight, and NASA facility repairs; previously the entire $200 million was going to come out of science. A Senate Appropriations Committee press release has similar numbers. What’s not clear is […]

By: anon

anon — Mon, 09 Feb 2009 21:45:15 +0000

The funding levels in the original post above are not the same as in the press release summarizing the bill.

The committee summary says the compromise is as follows:

Earth Science: $450M
Aero: $200M
Cross-agency: $200M
Exploration: $450M

Interestingly, the funding to close the gap is in the Exploration account (at elast it was in the original Senate bill), implying that they don;t intend to close the gap by extending the Shuttle. FWIW.

By: Library: A Round-up of Reading « Res Communis

Library: A Round-up of Reading « Res Communis — Mon, 09 Feb 2009 19:08:08 +0000

[…] NASA funding (mostly) survives Senate stimulus compromise – Space Politics […]

By: red

red — Sun, 08 Feb 2009 18:41:36 +0000

Here are some more numbers that might have some space implications. The columns are the same as in the original post.

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Operations, research, and facilities $400M $427M $227M
Procurement, acquisition, & construction $600M $795M $795M

National Science Foundation
Research and related activities $2,500M $1,200M $1,000M
Major equipment and facilities construction $400M $150M $150M
Education and human resources $100M $50M $50M
Office of the Inspector General $2M $2M $2M

United States Geological Survey
Surveys, Investigations, and Research $200M $135M $135M

By: Al Fansome

Al Fansome — Sun, 08 Feb 2009 05:00:28 +0000

Considering recent history — particularly that of the so-called “Mikulski Miracle” (not) — if I was a betting man, I would bet that the $500M for shortening the gap will not make it through the conference.

The House will take its typical stance.

Mikulski (who will be in the conference) is not going to defend “shortening the gap” funding, when funding for Earth Science is being threatened.

Mikulski and House members will join forces to put money back in for Earth science.

Bill Nelson will not be in the conference.

I don’t see how the NASA funding holds up, considering the anger coming out of the House on what was cut by the Senate.

FWIW,

– Al

By: Major Tom

Major Tom — Sat, 07 Feb 2009 22:29:59 +0000

The round numbers all around and willy-nilly cuts are very troubling. It’s likely that there’s no programmatics behind any of this.

What exactly are we losing (a satellite, schedule, number of grants, etc.) by taking Earth Science from $500M to $300M?

What exactly are we buying in Constellation (a few weeks of Ares I/Orion schedule, a few percent better probability of meeting that schedule, etc.) with an additional $500M?

And how much of this NASA funding will actually be spent in the next, say, six months, in the suppossedly critical time window for stimulating the economy?

Is any of this worth these dollars?

Or are we just throwing the incomes of our grandchildren at NASA field center pork to buy a few more votes for certain congressmen in the next election?

Bleah…