<?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: NASA gets $17.8 billion in FY09 omnibus bill</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.spacepolitics.com/2009/02/23/nasa-gets-178-billion-in-fy09-omnibus-bill/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.spacepolitics.com/2009/02/23/nasa-gets-178-billion-in-fy09-omnibus-bill/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=nasa-gets-178-billion-in-fy09-omnibus-bill</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: Space Politics &#187; Administration to propose $18.7B NASA budget for FY2010</title>
		<link>http://www.spacepolitics.com/2009/02/23/nasa-gets-178-billion-in-fy09-omnibus-bill/#comment-193951</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Space Politics &#187; Administration to propose $18.7B NASA budget for FY2010]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Feb 2009 01:59:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=2035#comment-193951</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] for NASA for FY10. That would be nearly $1 billion more than what they agency is likely to get in the regular FY09 omnibus appropriations currently being considered by Congress. However, when the $1 billion in stimulus funding is added, it works out to about the same [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[&#8230;] for NASA for FY10. That would be nearly $1 billion more than what they agency is likely to get in the regular FY09 omnibus appropriations currently being considered by Congress. However, when the $1 billion in stimulus funding is added, it works out to about the same [&#8230;]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: red</title>
		<link>http://www.spacepolitics.com/2009/02/23/nasa-gets-178-billion-in-fy09-omnibus-bill/#comment-193831</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[red]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Feb 2009 12:59:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=2035#comment-193831</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Mark might be right in his status quo comment.  It seems like that for the most part, at least as far as my non-legal reading eyes see.

As far as Obama is concerned, he does have a space policy position from the campaign.  

www.barackobama.com/pdf/policy/Space_Fact_Sheet_FINAL.pdf

The question is whether or not that policy is for real or not.  I&#039;m sure it is in areas like education, Earth science, international collaboration, and aeronautics ... but what about innovation and commercial space, and non-NASA efforts from his space policy like ORS and ITAR reform?

As for Congress, the previous bill (which didn&#039;t see light) had a lot of emphasis on commercial space - COTS, commercial docking, prizes, etc.  It&#039;s a new Congress now ... has that emphasis fizzled away?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Mark might be right in his status quo comment.  It seems like that for the most part, at least as far as my non-legal reading eyes see.</p>
<p>As far as Obama is concerned, he does have a space policy position from the campaign.  </p>
<p><a href="http://www.barackobama.com/pdf/policy/Space_Fact_Sheet_FINAL.pdf" rel="nofollow">http://www.barackobama.com/pdf/policy/Space_Fact_Sheet_FINAL.pdf</a></p>
<p>The question is whether or not that policy is for real or not.  I&#8217;m sure it is in areas like education, Earth science, international collaboration, and aeronautics &#8230; but what about innovation and commercial space, and non-NASA efforts from his space policy like ORS and ITAR reform?</p>
<p>As for Congress, the previous bill (which didn&#8217;t see light) had a lot of emphasis on commercial space &#8211; COTS, commercial docking, prizes, etc.  It&#8217;s a new Congress now &#8230; has that emphasis fizzled away?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: H.R.1105: Making omnibus appropriations for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2009, and for other purposes &#171; Res Communis</title>
		<link>http://www.spacepolitics.com/2009/02/23/nasa-gets-178-billion-in-fy09-omnibus-bill/#comment-193486</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[H.R.1105: Making omnibus appropriations for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2009, and for other purposes &#171; Res Communis]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Feb 2009 16:57:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=2035#comment-193486</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] Jeff Foust has a lot of information on this bill at Space Politics. [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[&#8230;] Jeff Foust has a lot of information on this bill at Space Politics. [&#8230;]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: MarkWhittington</title>
		<link>http://www.spacepolitics.com/2009/02/23/nasa-gets-178-billion-in-fy09-omnibus-bill/#comment-193328</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[MarkWhittington]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Feb 2009 12:27:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=2035#comment-193328</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It seems, in absence of any spacepolicy position by the Obama administration, Congress is making it for him. And that position is the status quo, but with a little bit more money for science and aeronautics.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It seems, in absence of any spacepolicy position by the Obama administration, Congress is making it for him. And that position is the status quo, but with a little bit more money for science and aeronautics.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: red</title>
		<link>http://www.spacepolitics.com/2009/02/23/nasa-gets-178-billion-in-fy09-omnibus-bill/#comment-193038</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[red]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Feb 2009 04:31:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=2035#comment-193038</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Wow ... lots of earmarks.  It&#039;s interesting that after the recent Presidential campaign, the Adler Museum has a $900,000 earmark for planetarium equipment.

Education and Aeronautics get big boosts compared to what they&#039;d been getting recently.

The brief OSTP section before the NASA one is also worth reading, as it&#039;s about RTG material for NASA and a COTS-like effort with NASA and NOAA:

&quot;working with NASA and NOAA, develop a plan and program to
encourage commercial solutions to meet space-based Earth and space weather observation requirements of the United States government, similar to the federal investments in NASA&#039;s commercial orbital transportation services (COTS) program.&quot;

In the NOAA section: &quot;NOAA is directed to report ... on its plans to obtain space-based scientific data from commercial sources over the next three years.&quot;

There&#039;s something outside the basics for Constellation ... in the Science budget: 

&quot;... it will be critical that the Constellation program demonstrate unique capabilities to maintain synergies between free-flying scientific spacecraft and human spaceflight endeavors.Â· Accordingly, the bill provides $20,000,000 for NASA to undertake an assessment of the feasibility of using the Constellation architecture to service existing and future observatory-class scientific spacecraft, fully utilizing the unique, core expertise and competencies for in-space servicing developed by the Goddard Space Flight Center and its private sector partners for the Hubble Space Telescope.&quot;]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wow &#8230; lots of earmarks.  It&#8217;s interesting that after the recent Presidential campaign, the Adler Museum has a $900,000 earmark for planetarium equipment.</p>
<p>Education and Aeronautics get big boosts compared to what they&#8217;d been getting recently.</p>
<p>The brief OSTP section before the NASA one is also worth reading, as it&#8217;s about RTG material for NASA and a COTS-like effort with NASA and NOAA:</p>
<p>&#8220;working with NASA and NOAA, develop a plan and program to<br />
encourage commercial solutions to meet space-based Earth and space weather observation requirements of the United States government, similar to the federal investments in NASA&#8217;s commercial orbital transportation services (COTS) program.&#8221;</p>
<p>In the NOAA section: &#8220;NOAA is directed to report &#8230; on its plans to obtain space-based scientific data from commercial sources over the next three years.&#8221;</p>
<p>There&#8217;s something outside the basics for Constellation &#8230; in the Science budget: </p>
<p>&#8220;&#8230; it will be critical that the Constellation program demonstrate unique capabilities to maintain synergies between free-flying scientific spacecraft and human spaceflight endeavors.Â· Accordingly, the bill provides $20,000,000 for NASA to undertake an assessment of the feasibility of using the Constellation architecture to service existing and future observatory-class scientific spacecraft, fully utilizing the unique, core expertise and competencies for in-space servicing developed by the Goddard Space Flight Center and its private sector partners for the Hubble Space Telescope.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
