Bush Seeks 1-Percent Increase for NASA in 2007 Budget Re

[kdavis007]

<br />WASHINGTON — The White House is seeking a roughly 1-percent increase for NASA for 2007.<br /><br /> <br /><br />President George W. Bush’s 2007 request, which is due to be sent to Congress and released to the public Feb. 6, includes $16.792 billion for NASA.<br /><br /> <br /><br />Congress last year approved $16.6 billion for NASA for 2006, a sum that included $350 million in hurricane-recovery money and also a 1.28-percent rescission. Not counting that money, which NASA needs to repair its Gulf Coast facilities damaged last year by hurricanes Katrina and Rita, the White House request would represent a 3-percent increase over the 2006 level.<br /><br /> <br /><br />Within the NASA request, roughly $6.2 billion would go to the international space station and space shuttle programs, about $3.9 billion would go toward the development of new human and unmanned spacecraft needed to replace the shuttle and send astronauts to the Moon, about $5.3 billion would go to space and Earth science missions, and about $720 million would go to aeronautics research.<br /><br /> <br /><br />NASA has yet to release its 2006 operating plan, so it is not yet publicly known how much the agency intends to spend on each of its majors programs. Based on last year’s request, however, NASA’s Exploration Systems Mission Directorate, which is developing the hardware NASA needs for its return to the Moon, appears to be in line for the biggest increase. The $3.9 billion NASA is requesting for those efforts for 2007 is roughly $700 million more than it planned to spend this year.<br /><br /> <br /><br />The Space Operations Mission Directorate’s budget, which pays for the space shuttle and space station programs, would decline slightly under the 2007 plan, while NASA’s Science Mission Directorate would see only a modest 1-percent increase.<br /><br /> <br /><br />Aeronautics spending would be held essentially flat.

 

[ehs40]

good and welcome news every little bit will help

 

[subzero788]

It's a very modest increase but the fact that it has gone up at all is a good sign.

 

[kdavis007]

Better than a cut...

 

[grooble]

Or a kick in the nuts

 

[mattblack]

...Or a slap in the face with a wet fish!!<br /><br />A(ny) budget increase may turn out to be better than talking about the VSE in the State Of The Union Address: It gives Nasa what it needs and doesn't draw the space-enemies attention to it (much). <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p>One Percent of Federal Funding For Space: America <strong><em><u>CAN</u></em></strong> Afford it!!  LEO is a <strong><em>Prison</em></strong> -- It's time for a <em><strong>JAILBREAK</strong></em>!!</p> </div>

 

[kdavis007]

To me talk is cheap.. ....

 

[radarredux]

> <i><font color="yellow">roughly $6.2 billion would go to the international space station and space shuttle programs, about $3.9 billion would go toward the development of new human and unmanned spacecraft needed to replace the shuttle and send astronauts to the Moon</font>/i><br /><br />Wow! $10 billion for manned explortation of space! Who would have thunk that 4 years ago.<br /><br />By the way, 1% is less than inflation, so overall, it is a slight cut. However, I bet NASA does much better than most other discretionary non-DOD programs.</i>

 

[spayss]

'Supposedly' we're at war and there's a little matter od national debt that will top 8 trillion in 2007.<br /><br />That's about $1900 per person just to pay the service on the debt each year without touching the actual debt. The per capita expenditure on NASA each year is in the $45 per person range. Never doubt that out-of-control federal spending doesn't impact the ability of the USA to stay in the forefront of space exploration and other science and technology.

 

[radarredux]

> <i><font color="yellow">That's about $1900 per person just to pay the service on the debt each year without touching the actual debt. ...</font>/i><br /><br />I read the other day that non-discretionary budget items will be rising about 8% per year for some time to come, far higher than either inflation or the economy (and thus the revenue stream to the government). The end result is that discretionay budget items (like NASA) will get squeezed more than ever.<br /><br />My gut feeling is that non-discretionary government programs are going to need to demonstrate their relevance in order to hold onto their existing funding levels.</i>

 

[kdavis007]

More good news:<br />http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/dfw/news/nation/13798683.htm?template=contentModules/printstory.jsp