The shuttle program ending will cut thousands of jobs Nichols 11 (Hans, Staff @ Business Week, 4/29, http://www.businessweek.com/news/2011-04-29/nasa-delays-shuttle-endeavour-s-launch-until-at-least-may-2.html)
The end of the shuttle program will translate into thousands of lost NASA jobs in a state crucial to Obama’s re- election. “At the Cape they stand to lose seven or eight thousand jobs in the next year because of the shuttle program ending,” said Bretton Alexander, the president of the Commercial Spaceflight Federation, a Washington-based trade association of companies promoting commercial human spaceflight. Obama and Senator Bill Nelson, a Florida Democrat who in 1986 flew one shuttle mission as a payload specialist, “are taking a lot of heat for that, but that was going to happen no matter what,” he said. Florida Republicans have criticized Obama’s approach. “The president’s space policy is jeopardizing America’s longstanding commitment to manned space exploration,” Senator Marco Rubio wrote in the Orlando Sentinel on April 26. “This has serious consequences for Florida
As NASA's space shuttle program comes closer to its long-scheduled termination later this year, concern is growing in Florida and around the country about the future of the massive workforce currently employed both directly and indirectly by the program. Brevard County -- the central Florida home of the Kennedy Space Center, the famous Cape Canaveral launchpad and ten of thousands of highly trained and specialized aerospace workers -- is bracing itself for the worst. Many fear the impending end of the shuttle program will bring about a repeat of the economic devastation of 1975, when NASA abruptly cancelled the Apollo program; everything from rocket science to real estate was impacted, practically overnight. Huge layoffs are coming soon. Berger 11 (Eric, Staff @ Houston Chronicle, 6/30, http://blog.chron.com/finalmission/2011/06/behind-the-scenes-of-launch-preparations-massive-job-losses/)
Today NASA is down to 5,500 contractor employees and 1,200 civil servants working on the shuttle, said program manager John Shannon. That’s a total of 6,700 people who process the shuttle and support it during flight. John Shannon talks about STS-119. (NASA) If the shuttle launches July 8, as expected, another big layoff will come on July 22. At that time NASA will lay off about 3,200 contractors, Shannon said. “It’s tough to break up a team that has performed so well, for so long,” he said. The shuttle program will officially end 30 days after Atlantis’ wheels stop on Kennedy Space Center’s runway. By later this summer the number of contractors will fall to about 1,000 people to dispose of the program’s assets and prepare the shuttle’s for public display. In museums other than those in Houston.
Link – NASA Jobs Down
Without the 6 billion promised by Obama the budget is a cut.
Smith 11 (Josh, Staff @ International, 2/14, http://www.nextgov.com/nextgov/ng_20110214_6925.php)
The total amount budgeted for NASA matches 2010's funding of $18.7 billion, but the plan strips nearly $2 billion from the Space Operations program, which is responsible for operating the space shuttle and International Space Station. This reduction is based largely on the shuttle program drawing to an end (the last flight is scheduled this year), as well as a planned merger of the two directorates. Funding for NASA's Exploration directorate got a bump, funneling dollars to the programs developing the next generation of space vehicles and technology. Last year, Obama scuttled a Bush-era plan to return to the moon and called for more privatization, as well as missions to an asteroid and Mars. To meet those goals, however, the president proposed a $6 billion surge in funding over the next five years. Without any of that money, analysts say the current plan amounts to a budget cut.
A2: Link Turns – No Immediate Returns
Cuts from the budget aren’t allocated immediately
Moore 95 (David, Principal Analyst of Natural Resources and Commerce Division Congressional Budget Office, 3/16/95, http://www.cbo.gov/doc.cfm?index=4787&type=0) JPG
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee, I appreciate this opportunity to discuss restructuring the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and the agency's continuing effort to adapt to lower budgets. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) presented testimony to this Subcommittee in October 1993 and released a related study, Reinventing NASA, in March 1994, both of which respond to the questions before the Subcommittee today. CBO's last look at NASA reached two conclusions: Changing the way that NASA does business may offer improved program management and technical performance and some costreductions, but the associated budgetary savings are uncertain and unlikely to be realized in the near term. Canceling, scaling back, or stretching out programs and reducing NASA's federal workforce are necessary to lower the cost of NASA's program to the level included in the President's 1994 budget plan. Cost reductions created by more efficient management, procurement, and acquisition practices are unlikely to be large enough to allow NASA's budget to be cut further without additional reductions in its program. Ultimately, a smaller budget will mean a smaller program and fewer accomplishments for the civilian space program. The five-year plan consistent with the President's budget for 1996 requires the agency to make unspecified reductions of slightly more than $4 billion for 1997 through 2000. The agency is faced with the unenviable choice of reducing its current program, trimming its institutional capability (including the civilian workforce), dramatically narrowing its focus, or some mix of the three. The conclusion CBO reached 18 months ago seems more pertinent than ever: ultimately, a smaller budget will mean a smaller program and fewer accomplishments for the civilian space program. Absorbing a large part of the $4 billion reduction may be possible by decreasing NASA's civilian workforce and other costs carried in the agency's institutional accounts (largely captured in the accounts known as research and program management). One might question, however, whether maintaining the current program's scope with reduced overhead delivers the most benefittothetaxpayer. An alternative approach would be to adopt a strategy that narrows the agency's mission, or product line (to use the language of the private sector), based on a clear understanding of which activities produce the greatest benefit for their cost. That approach may capture even greater saving than those required by the President's request for 1996. NASA might be called on to make such larger reductions should the Congress devise an overall budget plan that reduces the deficit more than the President's budget proposal does.