Endi 2011 / Daniel/Jason/Kevin/Marc/MiHe/Parth/Simrun
Download 0.51 Mb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- Links – Webb
- IL – Tradeoff
Links – ConstellationConstellation Program costs 196 billion PBS News 11 [Ray Suarez, As Shuttle Retires, What's NASA's New Mission?, http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/science/july-dec11/space_07-11.html] As Shuttle Retires, What's NASA's New Mission? The space agency originally promised 50 flights a year, but never managed more than nine. The total bill was $196 billion, or roughly $1.5 billion a flight. One of the original goals was building a permanent base in space, the now-completed International Space Station. In 1990, the shuttle Discovery launched the Hubble space telescope. And in a famous repair mission, another crew serviced the Hubble in orbit to fix blurry images. There were two very public tragedies. The space agency originally promised 50 flights a year, but never managed more than nine. The total bill was $196 billion, or roughly $1.5 billion a flight. One of the original goals was building a permanent base in space, the now-completed International Space Station. Constellation programs hundreds of billions Orlando Sentinel 11 [Mike Lafferty, Sandy Adams' space problem, http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2011-07-11/news/os-blog-sandy-adams-space-issue-071111_1_space-program-space-station-constellation-program] While much of the nation was paying tribute to the space shuttle program’s accomplishments Friday, freshman Rep. Sandy Adams was using the launch of Atlantis as a springboard to go after the president. Adams’ office fired off this statement after the launch, starting with an obligatory “end of an era” observation before tearing into the president’s space policies. Her office then shipped out this interview with the local Fox affiliate with many of the same talking points. Asked what she would say to the workers losing their jobs, Adams stumbled through the (again) obligatory “thoughts and prayers” but couldn’t finish the sentence without returning to her talking points. One final email from her office directed readers to Adams’ blog published by The Hill, which you can read here, although it makes basically the same point: Barack Obama is to blame for a lack of direction in the U.S. space program. Adams’ position on the space program is something of a quandary for a freshman Republican who has aligned herself with the Tea Party. NASA has never been an efficient spender of the public’s money (the James Webb Telescope is $1.5 billion over budget and running years behind schedule). But it’s one of the few programs where Adams wants to keep dumping money, in part because she’s worried about the Chinese going to the moon to do what? She might be a fiscal conservative, but Adams was willing to spend untold amounts of money to keep the shuttle flying and government-supported workers on the payroll until a replacement launch vehicle was ready. It’s right here in her campaign web site. That would have meant continuing to fund the shuttle probably for another five or 10 years at a cost of $450 million per mission. The cost of the Constellation program, announced by President Bush in 2004, likely would have run into the hundreds of billions. And President Bush himself never envisioned extending the shuttle program through the successful launch of rockets built through the Constellation program. He had planned to stop launching the space shuttle in 2010. Criticizing Obamas space policy also puts Adams in the uncomfortable position of criticizing the shift from a top-down program that’s run by government to one that encourages private entrepreneurs like Elon Musk, Richard Branson and Robert Bigelow, who are innovating and developing their own launchers and spacecraft. In fact, NASA just signed a deal with Sierra Nevada, a company that’s building its own shuttle-like orbiter that could take astronauts to the space station. In fact, space travel seems to be entering something of a golden age for the private sector, thanks in part to the administration’s policies. Seems like that’s the kind of shift a conservative like Adams might embrace a little more enthusiastically. Links – WebbFunding for webb exceeds $6.5 billion Guardian, ‘11 [Robin McKie, NASA fights to save the James Webb space telescope from the axe, Guardian, http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2011/jul/09/nasa-james-webb-space-telescope]DM The cost of the observatory has soared from an initial estimate of $1.6bn (£996m) to more than $6.5bn (£4bn). As a result, budgets for other astronomical research projects have been slashed, leading the journalNature to describe the James Webb as "the telescope that ate astronomy". Last week the US House of Representatives' appropriations committee on commerce, justice, and science decided that it had had enough of these escalating costs and moved to cancel the project by stripping $1.9bn from Nasa's budget for next year. Webb telescope in NASA’s budget Christian Post 11 [Simon Saavedra, NASA After Atlantis: Mars, James Webb Space Telescope, http://www.christianpost.com/news/nasa-after-atlantis-mars-james-webb-space-telescope-52106/]DM NASA's various projects and programs have recently suffered blows due to the U.S. government's fiscal woes and the nation's waning interest in space. Take for example the James Webb telescope, also known as the telescope built to replace the now old Hubble Space Telescope and allow unprecedented research to NASA for the next two decades. NASA is fighting politicians who want to end this project due to its burdening budget costs. Estimates for the cost of this project have almost quadrupled since its inception and now the U.S. House of Representatives wants to put an end to this colossal project even though billions of dollars have already been invested. IL – TradeoffAgencies need to prioritize funds, new programs mean tradeoffs Perdue 9-10-10 (Sonny, governor of Atlanta “Preperation Procedures for Prioritized Program Budget” http://opb.georgia.gov/vgn/images/portal/cit_1210/62/34/163067717afy%202011%20and%20fy%202012%20budget%20instructions.pdf) The state strategic plan outlines the Governor’s priorities and the results citizens expect from their government. The state strategic plan is a guide and tool for crafting and evaluating budgets to ensure that the policy outcomes drive funding decisions. Programs are designed to deliver services according to a stated purpose in law and to deliver improved results to Georgians. In conjunction with developing the FY 2012 budget requests, agencies should prioritize programs/sub-programs and consider how they contribute to the goals and indicators in the state strategic plan. Similarly, use the agency strategic plan as a guide to prioritize initiatives within the agency. Agency funding is lump-sum GAO 1/2008-(investigative arm of congress examining payments of the government “Congressional Directives” pg 7-8 http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d08209.pdf )jc Any definition of the term earmark requires a reference to two other terms in appropriations law—lump-sum appropriations and line-item appropriations. A lump-sum appropriation is one that is made to cover a number of programs, projects, or items. Our publication, Principles of Federal Appropriations Law (also known as the Red Book), notes that GAO’s appropriations case law defines earmarks as “actions where Congress . . . designates part of a more general lump-sum appropriation for a particular object, as either a maximum, a minimum, or both.”8 Today, Congress gives federal agencies flexibility and discretion to spend among many different programs, projects, and activities financed by one lump-sum appropriation. For example, in fiscal year 2007, Congress appropriated a lump-sum appropriation of $22,397,581,000 for all Army Operations and Maintenance expenses.9 Many smaller agencies receive only a single appropriation, usually termed Salaries and Expenses or Operating Expenses. All of the agency’s operations must be funded from this single appropriation. Tight 2012 budget means trade off of funds Berret 2-15-11-(Dan Barret is a staff writer at inside higher ed “Tough Love” Budget science http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2011/02/15/obama_s_budget_spares_science_research_from_the_axe-)jc government operations through appropriations, and to prescribe the conditions governing the use of those appropriations. This power is referred to generally as the government operations through appropriations, and to prescribe the conditions governing the use of those appropriations. This power is referred to generally as the government operations through appropriations, and to prescribe the conditions governing the use of those appropriations. This power is referred to generally as the government operations through appropriations, and to prescribe the conditions governing the use of those appropriations. This power is referred to generally as the government operations through appropriations, and to prescribe the conditions governing the use of those appropriations. This power is referred to generally as the government operations through appropriations, and to prescribe the conditions governing the use of those appropriations. This power is referred to generally as the government operations through appropriations, and to prescribe the conditions governing the use of those appropriations. This power is referred to generally as the government operations through appropriations, and to prescribe the conditions governing the use of those appropriations. This power is referred to generally as the government operations through appropriations, and to prescribe the conditions governing the use of those appropriations. This power is referred to generally as the government operations through appropriations, and to prescribe the conditions governing the use of those appropriations. This power is referred to generally as the http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2011/02/15/obama_s_budget_spares_science_research_from_the_axe http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2011/02/15/obama_s_budget_spares_science_research_from_the_axe http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2011/02/15/obama_s_budget_spares_science_research_from_the_axe http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2011/02/15/obama_s_budget_spares_science_research_from_the_ http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2011/02/15/obama_s_budget_spares_science_research_from_the_ http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2011/02/15/obama_s_budget_spares_science_research_from_the_ http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2011/02/15/obama_s_budget_spares_science_research_from_the_ http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2011/02/15/obama_s_budget_spares_science_research_from_the_ http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2011/02/15/obama_s_budget_spares_science_research_from_the_ http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2011/02/15/obama_s_budget_spares_science_research_from_the_ http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2011/02/15/obama_s_budget_spares_science_research_from_the_ http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2011/02/15/obama_s_budget_spares_science_research_from_the_ http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2011/02/15/obama_s_budget_spares_science_research_from_the_ http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2011/02/15/obama_s_budget_spares_science_research_from_the_ http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2011/02/15/obama_s_budget_spares_science_research_from_the_ http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2011/02/15/obama_s_budget_spares_science_research_from_the_ http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2011/02/15/obama_s_budget_spares_science_research_from_the_ http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2011/02/15/obama_s_budget_spares_science_research_from_the_ http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2011/02/15/obama_s_budget_spares_science_research_from_the_axe http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2011/02/15/obama_s_budget_spares_science_research_from_the_axe http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2011/02/15/obama_s_budget_spares_science_research_from_the_axe http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2011/02/15/obama_s_budget_spares_science_research_from_the_axe http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2011/02/15/obama_s_budget_spares_science_research_from_the_axe Bottom of Form In all, the president's budget includes $66.8 billion in non-defense research and development, which represents an increase of $4.1 billion, or 6.5 percent, over actual appropriations in 2010. The levels for the current year are still undetermined -- and, in fact, face an uncertain future following a House resolution introduced Friday that would cut $100 billion from Obama's 2011 budget. Obama's budget increases for 2011 and 2012 outstrip the 2.7 percent rate of inflation over the past two years. "All of these investments are being made in the context of a tough love budget," said John P. Holdren, assistant to the president for science and technology and director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, during a briefing at the American Association for the Advancement of Science here Monday afternoon. "These are the kinds of trade-offs we wish we didn't have to make, but which we do have to make." Those trade-offs made winners and losers out of agencies and programs. The biggest winners, as it relates to research, included the National Science Foundation ($7.8 billion in proposed appropriations, or a 13 percent increase over the 2010 enacted level in today's dollars); the Department of Energy's Office of Science ($5.4 billion, up 10.7 percent); and the National Institute of Standards and Technology's intramural laboratories ($764 million, up 15.1 percent). Officials described research on clean energy, nanotechnology, climate change, wireless infrastructure and cybersecurity as being among the areas of greatest interest. Low priority programs will trade off with new programs Raloff 3/12/11,(Janet, senior editor at science news “2012 budget offers pain and gain for R&D” http://www.sciencenews.org/view/generic/id/69896/title/2012_budget_offers_pain_and_gain_for_R%2BD) JC President Obama sent the research community a valentine of sorts in his proposed 2012 federal budget. Sent to Congress on February 14, the budget was a pledge to fight for increased investment in research and education even as the president committed to a belt-tightening for most segments of federal spending.  The $3.7 trillion proposal allocates $147.9 billion to research and development in the coming fiscal year, which begins on October 1. That amounts to a small decrease from the 2011 fiscal year, after accounting for a projected 1.3 percent rate of inflation. Many R&D programs would see expanded or new funding to meet a number of administration goals, said presidential science adviser John Holdren, including: doubling the budgets for the National Science Foundation, the Energy Department’s Office of Science and the National Institute of Standards and Technology spurring development of clean energy technologies and providing national high-speed Internet access improving science, technology, engineering and math education and promoting private R&D investment by expanding the R&D tax credit and making it permanent. To pay for those priorities, Holdren says, agencies were asked to make the painful determination of which programs were underperforming or of lower priority to the president’s national objective “to out-innovate, out-educate and out-build the rest of the world.”
Directory: file -> view view -> Western Europe after wwii view -> Author study: paul fleischman view -> Qpa1 7ela study Guide view -> Arctic Oil/Gas Neg view -> November 1970 Approximately 150,000-500,000 deaths Bhola Cyclone Bangladesh view -> Grade Level: 6 Unit of Study: Caribbean glce view -> Citation: Duffield, Katy view -> Table of Contents Lesson # view -> Chinese Wind Energy Disad Download 0.51 Mb. Share with your friends:
|