Link: New Spending = Unpopular

Link: New Spending = Unpopular

The House Appropriations Committee released its draft Commerce, Justice, and Science (CJS) appropriations bill today, and the news is by and large not good for NASA. The committee is proposing $16.81 billion for NASA in FY12, nearly $2 billion less than the $18.724 billion in the president’s FY12 request. Here is an account-by-account comparison between the president’s budget request (PBR) and the House Appropriations Committee (HAC) draft bill (all values in millions of dollars): Within Exploration, the House bill includes $1.063 billion for the MPCV and $1.985 billion for the SLS, both slightly higher than the administration’s request. In addition, although the text of the legislation doesn’t specifically mention it, the press release accompanying it states that the bill terminates funding for the James Webb Space Telescope because it is “billions of dollars over budget and plagued by poor management.” The CJS subcommittee of the House Appropriations Committee is scheduled to mark up the bill tomorrow, with the full committee to take it up the following week.

Space exploration is perceived as controversial new spending -- guarantees backlash.

Handberg, 11 - Professor and Chair of the Department of Political Science at the University of Central Florida (Rodger, “Small ball or home runs: the changing ethos of US human spaceflight policy,” The Space Review, 1/17, http://www.thespacereview.com/article/1759/1)

The US space program remained focused, not on duplicating Apollo, but on achieving another difficult goal such as going to Mars, a logical extension truly of the Apollo effort. Twice, the presidents Bush provided the presidential rationale, if not support, for achieving great things. The Space Exploration Initiative (SEI) in 1989 and the Vision for Space Exploration (VSE) in 2004 were announced with great fanfare but neither survived the realities of congressional and presidential budgeting. The VSE appeared on paper more realistic about funding, but its choices were draconian: the ISS and space shuttle were both to be sacrificed on the altar of the new program. The earlier SEI died quickly, so hard choices were not required, while the VSE in the form of the Constellation Program lingers on although its effective demise appears certain. The Obama Administration prefers another approach while the new Congress is likely more hostile to big ticket discretionary spending. If the Tea Party faction in the Republican House caucus means what it says, the future for Constellation or any other similar program is a dim one. The reality is that the Apollo program, the SEI, and the VSE are examples in space terms of the home run approach. Such efforts confront the cruel but obvious reality that the human spaceflight program is considered by the public and most of Congress to be a “nice to have,” but not a necessity when compared to other programs or national priorities. Congressional support is narrow and constituency-driven (i.e. protect local jobs), which means most in Congress only support the space program in the abstract. Big ticket items or programs are not a priority for most, given other priorities. What happens is what can be loosely termed normal politics: a situation where human spaceflight remains a low priority on the national agenda. Funding for bold new initiatives is going to be hard to come by even when the economy recovers and deficits are under control. The home run approach has run its course at least for a time; now the small ball approach becomes your mantra.

Link: GOP Hates NASA

Republicans not supporting NASA

Roop ’11 (Lee, Huntsville Times, “NASA supporters find no white knight in GOP presidential field”, http://blog.al.com/breaking/2011/06/nasa_supporters_find_no_white.html)

For example, reporter Richard Dunham of the Houston Chronicle opened his report by writing, "The Republican presidential field sent a clear message to NASA workers in Texas and Florida: They don't see a federal role in funding human space flight." The critical moment came when CNN moderator John King asked if any GOP candidate would raise a hand to show support for continued federal funding for NASA. On the stage were Texas Rep. Ron Paul, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty, Minnesota Rep. Michele Bachmann, former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich and former Godfather's Pizza CEO Herman Cain. "Nobody," King commented as the field stood silently with hands down. Pawlenty did step to the microphone after King's "nobody" remark to say NASA had "played a vital role" in American history. "I don't think we should be eliminating the space program," Pawlenty said. But Pawlenty followed up with his idea of a space program, and the word NASA wasn't in it. "We can partner with private providers to get more economies of scale," Pawlenty said, "and scale it back, but I don't think we should eliminate the space program." Gingrich started the discussion when he responded to a debate question by calling NASA a "case study in why a bureaucracy can't innovate." But Gingrich said later that moderator King was mischaracterizing his position. "I didn't say end the space program," Gingrich said. "We built the transcontinental railroads without a National Department of Railroads. You could get into space faster, better, more effectively, more creatively if you decentralized it, got it out of Washington and cut out the bureaucracy." So, for those keeping score, the only Republican candidates talking about space Monday night did so while using phrases such as "scale it back," "get it out of Washington" and "cut out the bureaucracy."

New GOP Congress shifts the political wind against NASA.

Logsdon, 11 - Space Policy Institute, Elliott School of International Affairs, George Washington University (John, “A new US approach to human spaceflight?,” Space Policy, February, Science Direct)

To complicate matters even further, the November elections resulted in a shift of party control to Republican leadership in the House of Representatives and a reduced Democrat majority in the Senate. Many Republicans are making reduction in government spending a top priority issue. If the NASA appropriation is not approved until the new Congress convenes in January 2011, NASA could face budget reductions below what the Congress has authorized, making it even more difficult to move forward with what remains of the new human spaceflight strategy.

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 0.85 Mb.

Share with your friends: