Democrats cut NASA budget

Status
Not open for further replies.
J

jhoblik

Guest
Democrats are going to kill advance in space program<br />Couple month I was discussing that issue, that democrats regardless of their rhetoric, they are going to stop any funding for really new advances in space adventure. People disagree and as argument they talk about 60 and Apolo program. But today democrat party is totally different.<br />We have new congress and house and there will be cutoff money for NASA. I remember cry of democrats when some NASA scientific program was cut.<br />I am worrying that stop program like COST.<br />The only party that support some way hope moving ahead is republican. Think next time when you cast your vote. If your heart is supporting space expansion.<br />
 
M

MeteorWayne

Guest
I think you are oversimplifying here.<br />All the Dem's have done is continued last years budget (since we have been operating without one as the Repubs abdicated their responsibility to pass the budget before adjourning) until a budget can be developed. This certainly is not good news for NASA, nor is it for any other part of the government, but since the old budget was not passed by the last Congress, something had to be done in the interim.<br />Perhaps you should write your representative and Senator and suggest what you think they should do? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>
 
M

mithridates

Guest
So support Bill Richardson for president. He's the guy you want if you want a president that has a personal interest in space. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>----- </p><p>http://mithridates.blogspot.com</p> </div>
 
M

MeteorWayne

Guest
Well, let's see what the other 47 candidates have to say ON ALL THE ISSUES before we make a decision. We have plenty of time. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>
 
B

BReif

Guest
And it isn't just NASA that is frozen at FY2006 levels, but that is pretty much across the board. While this isn't a cut per se, given the plan to increase the budget annually as the VSE is researched, built and comes on line, it actually is a cut. Will it kill the VSE, I don't think so, however it may cause delays. Remember, VSE was authorized by Congress in 2005 as national policy, and space activities, whether they are ARES and Orion, or something else, are oriented toward the VSE. The VSE is a Vision (which costs nothing). The programs that are implemented to acheive the Vision, that is where the money is going to be spent. And it is US Space Policy that space programs be about acheiving this vision. That Policy had braod bi-partisan support, both Republicans and Democrats, many of whom are still on Capitol Hill.
 
T

trailrider

Guest
Same stuff, different year! And ten-twenty years down the road everybody, including Congress will be moanin' an' groanin' about why the programs cost twice what was originally "sold" to them! <img src="/images/icons/frown.gif" /> <br /><br />On the other hand, I wonder how much "pad" NASA put in their budget as a contingency for this nonsense? (See Scott, Montgomery, Chief Engineer, U.S.S. Enterprise on estimating times for repairs, e.g., when Capt. Kirk asked how long repairs would take, Scotty always gave him twice the extimate he really expected. That made Scotty and the Engineering Section look like geniuses when they got things done in half the time. Works the same way with Congressional budgets, except in dollars instead of hours!) Be nice if everybody would come clean about costs vs schedules. But they don't call it "Foggy Bottom" for nothin'!<br /><br />Ad Luna! Ad Ares! Ad Astra!<br />Trailrider
 
K

kdavis007

Guest
No want they are going to do is transfer money from one program to another program.. Mainly the useless social programs...
 
G

gunsandrockets

Guest
"Democrats are going to kill advance in space program"<br /><br />As much as I might agree with you, your thread is an overtly political topic and therefore belongs in the free space forum, not the missions and launches forum.
 
G

gunsandrockets

Guest
[Democrats are going to kill advance in space program]<br /><br />"It might be helpful if you posted some evidence of this claim." <br /><br />I think the space program proposed by 2004 candidate John Kerry is plenty of evidence of the intended direction of the Democratic Party as regards manned space exploration. The recent budget passed by the Democrats inflexibly locking NASA into spending half a billion less than programmed for manned space exploration is more evidence. It's possible the congressional Democrats will reverse themselves for the FY 2008 NASA budget, but we'll see. As for the 2008 Democratic presidential candidates, I fully expect they will echo the Kerry promise to reverse NASA policy back to the good 'ol days of the Clinton administration. In other words an ever declining budget, and manned spaceflight forever locked into LEO.<br /><br />"...It's unfortunate that NASA may not get the funding they wish to carry out their projects, but you can't put all the blame for this on Democrats. The best chance we have of having a vital and active space program is when the nation gets back to having a balanced budget,...'<br /><br />What a joke. A phony 'balanced budget' like Clinton brought us? Balanced with the phony accounting trick of lumping social security taxes (lockbox? what lockbox?) to balance out discretionary spending? And even the discretionary spending only balanced by cutting the guts out of the Department of Defense? It was during the Clinton years when the Army shrunk from 16 active divisions to only 10, and many projects for replacing old cold-war era equipment were stretched out or deferred to budget 'out years' -- the so-called 'peace dividend'.<br /><br />It's colossal misdirection to blame the Democratic instinct against manned spaceflight on the Bush tax cuts. How is it that the rest of the NASA budget not dedicated to manned spaceflight is fat and happy? Despite such boondoggles as the 1 billion dollar cost overrun on the James Webb S
 
M

mikeemmert

Guest
<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>"Democrats are going to kill advance in space program" <br /><br />As much as I might agree with you, your thread is an overtly political topic and therefore belongs in the free space forum, not the missions and launches forum.<p><hr /></p></p></blockquote>Since this a true statement, I wonder why official complaints from swampcat and MeteorWayne have been sitting in the "Move This Thread" thread for over 8 hours without the moderators acting on it?<br /><br />I rarely post on M&L anymore because my history here is one of getting an ad-hom ambush from the occasional visitors to Free Space who have seen my posts there. So, since the mods have been informed twice and have left the trolling thread title in here where the lurkers can see it, I'm going to comment on your post.<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>[Democrats are going to kill advance in space program] <br /><br />"It might be helpful if you posted some evidence of this claim." <br /><br />I think the space program proposed by 2004 candidate John Kerry is plenty of evidence of the intended direction of the Democratic Party as regards manned space exploration.<p><hr /></p></p></blockquote>John Kerry has announced that he will not run in 2008, therefore his views no longer represent viewpoints of the Democratic Party. He sure as hell doesn't represent the views of the Vietnam Veterans Against the War anymore. He doesn't represent my views. In fact, he was made the Democratic candidate by Repubican crossover voters in New Hampshire who didn't need to be told that their vote in the Republican primary there would be superfluous. So they created a Swiftboat ambush for the Democrats with their dishonest ploy of selecting an unelectable candidate for the Democrats. It was sickening. If you look at my profile it says, "Voted FOR Howard Dean BEFORE I voted against W." Dean would have won.<br /><br />mithridates and crazyeddie are right, Bill Richardson is T
 
L

lampblack

Guest
This whole thread is much to-do about not much at all.<br /><br />The Democrats aren't likely to grant NASA any major funding increases -- but neither are the Republicans. The whole VSE thang is predicated on the notion of paying for it within the context of keeping NASA's overall funding levels at more or less where they are.<br /><br />And what if the present year's funding levels DO get stuck at 2006 levels? Well, the agency's stated policy approach is to pay for what it can -- when it can.<br /><br />Absent thoroughly Draconian cuts -- which nobody expects -- the worst that will happen is that the deadlines get pushed back. Things may slip by a year or two. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font color="#0000ff"><strong>Just tell the truth and let the chips fall...</strong></font> </div>
 
H

halman

Guest
jhoblik,<br /><br />When the roof is leaking, the water heater is spewing rust, and the furnace won't start by itself, going out and buying a new car is not what most people would do. Irregardless of the Iraq war, the finances of the United States are in great disarray, partly because we have become a nation of consumers, instead of a nation of producers. To make money, you have to produce something. To consume, you have to have money. In order to continue consuming, we keep borrowing money.<br /><br />Space technology is one of the few areas that the U.S. is still a leader. Putting people to work building rockets, space stations, and Lunar habitats is one of the small number of options left for getting something useful out of Federal dollars. Compare this with the 18 billion dollars being spent currently to fight drug abuse, which, according to field agents of the D.E.A., surveys, and statistics, is money being wasted.<br /><br />We could increase the NASA budget without increasing the federal budget by shutting down the D.E.A. and transferring its budget to NASA. This would give people interested in engineering belief that they might be able to find work if they go into the engineering field, provide the funds needed to expand our exploration efforts, and reduce the pressures making recreational drugs so profitable.<br /><br />The situation in Iraq threatens the stability of the entire Middle East, so don't expect the U.S. to withdraw its troops any time soon. To do so would put our primary source of oil in jeopardy, which is unacceptable. Look for new rhetoric coming from Democratic leaders justifying continuing the military intervention in the internal affairs of a sovereign state, while we manage to ignore the carnage going on in Africa.<br /><br />Yes, it is time to write to our Congress members, to remind them that investing in the future is the only way to have any say in what kind of future we will have. And get used to riding a bicycle, walking, and teleco <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> The secret to peace of mind is a short attention span. </div>
 
S

Swampcat

Guest
<font color="yellow">"...I wonder why official complaints from swampcat and MeteorWayne have been sitting in the "Move This Thread" thread for over 8 hours without the moderators acting on it?"</font><br /><br />Mike,<br /><br />I just want to point out that I was not complaining. I was simply expressing my opinion, as others have in the past, that M&L (recall that this stands for Missions and Launches <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" />) is not the appropriate forum for political discussion. <br /><br />Whether this thread stays in M&L or not is not my decision. Frankly, I could care less. IMO, Republicans and Democrats are collectively responsible for the budget mess. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font size="3" color="#ff9900"><p><font size="1" color="#993300"><strong><em>------------------------------------------------------------------- </em></strong></font></p><p><font size="1" color="#993300"><strong><em>"I hold it that a little rebellion now and then is a good thing, and as necessary in the political world as storms in the physical. Unsuccessful rebellions, indeed, generally establish the encroachments on the rights of the people which have produced them. An observation of this truth should render honest republican governors so mild in their punishment of rebellions as not to discourage them too much. It is a medicine necessary for the sound health of government."</em></strong></font></p><p><font size="1" color="#993300"><strong>Thomas Jefferson</strong></font></p></font> </div>
 
M

mattblack

Guest
It has been ironic that in recent years its been notable Democratic politicians, such as Barbara Mikulski and Bill Nelson, who have helped get Nasa it's budget increases in the wake of the Bush announcement of the VSE. Let us not forget that Mr Bush is/was just a figurehead of the VSE announcement. I doubt he is actually that big a fan of spaceflight. While he was Governor of Texas, he never even visited JSC. And to the Return To Flight launches he sent Mrs Bush and Dick Cheney. Though the President was probably a bit busy around those times!!<br /><br />Even JFK, in taped transcripts before the famous speech-- "I believe this nation should commit itself, before this decade is out; of landing a man on the Moon and returning him safely to the Earth"--: Even he was recorded saying "I'm not that interested in space".<br /><br />It's true. As far as VSE goes, Mr Bush has been asked to, or has himself NOT hitched his wagon to the VSE. The VSE should be a bi-partisan effort, not dragged down by an unpopular President and it has, for the most part, been exactly so. But we can't lose sight of the Far-Left of the Democrats who often shoot down man-in-space efforts. ISS snd even the Shuttle barely survived because of them all those years ago.<br /><br />We may not agree with details of the VSE, but surely we can support the overall intent of it: U.S. Astronauts learning to live and work ON OTHER WORLDS for much less than 1% percent of the Federal Budget.<br /><br />This current budget 'hiccup', especially in regards to Nasa, is a bit of an anomaly. And I'm more inclined to blame Repubs & Dems equally for the mess than single any one out. But if it happens again next year.... <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>
 
M

mikeemmert

Guest
Thank you for introducing Barbara Mikulski and Bill Nelson to the lurkers, mattblack. As to the Far(far far)-left Democrats that you mentioned, well...they exist ... <img src="/images/icons/blush.gif" /> . But so does <i><b><font color="yellow">BILL RICHARDSON (FOR PRESIDENT)!!!</font></b></i><font color="white"> <img src="/images/icons/cool.gif" /> .<br /><br />Basically, I think that VSE should be subordinate to certain ohter projects that ultimately will help manned exploration more than rushing ahead right now. We have already been to the Moon, let the other countries catch up a little; we have a treaty such that flag-planting merely motivates that countries students to study calculus & physics. No other country will ever be First again.<br /><br />Now, the Ares launchers are good little rockets, I'm sure (I was surprised how many different models there were!) but I would like to point out that that technology was stolen from China and is now nearly a thousand years old. Now, we have specific programs that didn't turn out as well as expected, like NASP and X-33, but I still believe the potential is there. X-33 was promoted by the great internet instigator, Al Gore, to replace the Republican red-herring NASP; such a search for radical technologies should continue where X-33 left off. This takes money and, yes, I would siphon it from the VSE program.<br /><br />In addition, we need to make a major investment in elevators, and rotovators in case those don't work. And yes, I would siphon that money off from VSE, too, since Iraq siphoned off dollars from every worthwhile Federal program. (I'm very concerned about currents induced in long cables by coronal mass ejections from the Sun; that might kill the full-length elevator concept but rotovators should still work as upper stage boosters. I don't know how to calculate inductance. Anybody here know how to do that?).<br /><br />Beam powered vehicles are pretty far future. We might get started with a World <i>Land</i> Speed R</font>
 
M

MeteorWayne

Guest
They do if the've ridden the Metro <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /><br />I've used the Foggy Bottom station many times. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>
 
M

mattblack

Guest
Eh??!<br /><br /> />>We have already been to the Moon, let the other countries catch up a little<<<br /><br />America landed in 6 places for a total of 13 days, with just a few square miles explored. If you think that's all the Moon has to offer -- that's like landing at LAX and 5 other airports, walking up and down the runways and saying "Yep; I've seen America!" The Moon's 100 million+plus square miles are still so very largely unexplored, Mike. <br /><br /> />>Now, we have specific programs that didn't turn out as well as expected, like NASP and X-33, but I still believe the potential is there.<<<br /><br />SSTO technology is largely "fools gold rocketry". If expendables can scarcely get funded today, what makes you think very hard technology like that will?<br /><br /> />>X-33 was promoted by the great internet instigator, Al Gore, to replace the Republican red-herring NASP<<<br /><br />BOTH were red herrings. Both sides are capable of it!<br /><br /> />>In addition, we need to make a major investment in elevators, and rotovators<<<br /><br />If you mean space elevators, then those very same coronal mass ejections you mentioned would make it very hard to shield human passengers from their radiation and that of the Van Allen Belts. Travelling on space elevators for extended periods through these or solar storms would fry the passengers: enough shielding to protect them would make the cable-travelling vessels too heavy, negating their usefulness. I'd say space elevator concepts would be best left for light-medium, unmanned freight -- anything else is pure, intriguing Sci-Fi. <br /><br /> />>Iraq siphoned off dollars from every worthwhile Federal program<<<br /><br />You are certainly not wrong there.<br /><br /> />>The failure of the (admittedly ill-conceived) Biosphere II points out the need for more habitability research aboard ISS, where there is a a rescue capability. I would hate to see astronauts stranded on the Moon with toxi <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>
 
S

Swampcat

Guest
<font color="yellow">"I stand by my statement."</font><br /><br />Mike, are you being purposefully obtuse? Which statement are you standing by? Was it the one where you stated I was "officially"complaining about your obviously political thread in a forum obviously intended for missions and launches or was it that whole litany of blame-the-Republicans-and-praise-the-Democrats-for-everything?<br /><br />If the former, why is making a suggestion considered a complaint by you? Obviously, at least so far, the moderators disagree with me. I can live with that. No big deal. What's with the attitude?<br /><br />If the latter, I consider both Republicans <b><i>and</i></b> Democrats to be at fault for the sorry state of this country's government. I have no horse in this race. IMHO, simply throwing more money at NASA is not the best approach to expanding Humanity's activities in space...unless that money is being used to develop economic opportunities for the people of this nation and not just as corporate welfare. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font size="3" color="#ff9900"><p><font size="1" color="#993300"><strong><em>------------------------------------------------------------------- </em></strong></font></p><p><font size="1" color="#993300"><strong><em>"I hold it that a little rebellion now and then is a good thing, and as necessary in the political world as storms in the physical. Unsuccessful rebellions, indeed, generally establish the encroachments on the rights of the people which have produced them. An observation of this truth should render honest republican governors so mild in their punishment of rebellions as not to discourage them too much. It is a medicine necessary for the sound health of government."</em></strong></font></p><p><font size="1" color="#993300"><strong>Thomas Jefferson</strong></font></p></font> </div>
 
M

mikeemmert

Guest
<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>Was it the one where you stated I was "officially"complaining about your obviously political thread <p><hr /></p></p></blockquote>It's not my thread. It's jhoblik's. Check it out. I just posted here.
 
J

JonClarke

Guest
I had hoped when people refused to rise to the obvious flame bait of the OP and started to discuss policy and budgetary issues instead there was a chance this thread would lead to productive discussion. It did for a while but for some several people the temptation to move onto OT tangents and bring in party partisanship into the discussion was too great.<br /><br />So I am locking thread. Please remember that in future in it is not necessary or constructive to rise to every flame bait or to drag down every thread to the level of partisan politics. And if you are tempted to start a thread with an obvious flame bait post, don't. <br /><br />Jon <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Whether we become a multi-planet species with unlimited horizons, or are forever confined to Earth will be decided in the twenty-first century amid the vast plains, rugged canyons and lofty mountains of Mars</em>  Arthur Clarke</p> </div>
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts