Senate votes extra $1 billion for NASA

Status
Not open for further replies.
D

docm

Guest
http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=23712<br /><br /><br /><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p><b>Science, Spaceflight Programs at Risk after Return to Flight Efforts</b><br /><br />WASHINGTON - U.S. Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX), Ranking Member of the Senate Commerce Subcommittee on Space, Aeronautics and Related Sciences, and Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D-MD), the Chairman of the Commerce, Justice and Science Appropriation (CJS) Subcommittee, today passed an amendment to the Fiscal Year 2008 CJS appropriations bill to provide $1 billion in additional funding for NASA. The funding will reimburse the agency for costs incurred for returning the Space Shuttle to flight status following the Columbia disaster and implementing recommendations of the Columbia Accident Investigation Board.<br /><br />"My amendment will compensate NASA for the costs of returning to flight and restore funding for key research areas such as space science, earth science, life and microgravity sciences and aeronautics research," Sen. Hutchison said. "It will also help close the gap between when the Space Shuttle is retired and the next exploration vehicle is launched. With China, India and other countries moving forward with manned spaceflight, the stakes are too high for America to lose its edge as the world leader in space exploration."<br /><br />Sens. Richard Shelby (R-AL), Bill Nelson (D-FL), Robert Bennett (R-UT), Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY), Mary Landrieu (D-LA), Joseph Lieberman (I-CT), Mel Martinez (R-FL), Ken Salazar (D-CO), and David Vitter (R-LA) are also original cosponsors.<br /><br />"NASA shouldn't have to play a shell game of shifting funds from one area to another in order to get by," Sen. Hutchison said. "NASA performed its duty superbly when it returned the Space Shuttle to flight; however, NASA's core scientific mission has suffered since then due to the lack of funding."<</safety_wrapper></p></blockquote> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
 
J

jschaef5

Guest
So where would this money go? <br /><br />Manned space flight? I thought they covered the costs by cutting science projects? So would this money go to those folks?<br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
 
D

docm

Guest
IMO down the crapper. Most of it will just cover the useless expense of Ares I-X with a bit left over for someone else to squander on something else. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
 
G

gunsandrockets

Guest
Sounds like good news to me. Hillary as a co-sponsor is also interesting.
 
U

usn_skwerl

Guest
thats only because she openly loathes the military. its great for nasa, but crappy for many troops who are being forced out of the military. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
 
A

askold

Guest
Those senators are from Texas, Alabama, Utah and Florida.<br /><br />Say, isn't that where NASA has big facilities. Nah - it's probably just a coincidence...
 
U

usn_skwerl

Guest
i dont even wade into the waters there...i'm just making a statement that i am glad that the moneys going towards science, and not funding this war. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
 
J

jimfromnsf

Guest
Just the same as any aircraft project or any other science project. It is not unique to the space program. Military applications are found in every thing
 
B

brellis

Guest
My 25-y.o. Synclavierâ„¢, the first digital music workstation, is built with military hardware. I always think about the Voyagers when I turn it on <img src="/images/icons/cool.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font size="2" color="#ff0000"><em><strong>I'm a recovering optimist - things could be better.</strong></em></font> </p> </div>
 
O

onibocho

Guest
Its a deal with the devil. But it's a small evil that can lead to a greater good. Most of humanities leaps of advancement had some level of military aplication involved. <br />I think that human expansion into space should take presidence. As Hawkings pointed out it is mankinds best guarentee for continued survival. <br />Ironic that space investment is a fraction of defence spending yet the world community constantly debates on the "waistfulness" of the space program.<br />It makes me shudder sometimes at the shear shortsightedness of the world community.
 
F

frodo1008

Guest
I could care less how or why NASA gets an extra boost (at least some of which will also help the space science and robotics programs). If NASA did not spread its centers among states that are politically important, then there would be NO NASA and NO space Science or robotics programs, just as there would not even be human space flight to LEO let alone going on to the moon and eventually Mars.<br /><br />So why make snide comments about political realities?<br /><br />If you even support the space science programs, then you should be pumping for even more NASA funding. I just have a problem with the negativity that you and some others show here. <br /><br />The space shuttle and ISS budgets will be steadily shrinking over the next 4 years to a level of less than $2 billion, and even this should be made up with any kind of reasonable increases in NASA's over all budget.<br /><br />So, as Griffin himself has said, basically he is not asking for special increases for the VSE program, so I can see no problem with supporting him here. So why not at least try to be somewhat more positive for a change!!
 
A

askold

Guest
I wouldn't have to be cynical is these senators weren't disingenuous.<br /><br /> "It will also help close the gap between when the Space Shuttle is retired and the next exploration vehicle is launched. With China, India and other countries moving forward with manned spaceflight, the stakes are too high for America to lose its edge as the world leader in space exploration." <br /><br />Sounds very noble. But there's no mention of the huge NASA facilities in the sentors' states. However, when they're campaining for reelection I bet they'll tell the voters in their states how much money they brought into their state.
 
F

frodo1008

Guest
You do seem to have a problem with how our republic (and every other democratic republic in the world. past or present) actually works. These senators and congress people ARE elected (hired in private industry) to work for their constituents. Does Boeing hire people to work for LM?<br /><br />No, of course not! For the same reason these people work to bring both jobs and funding to their particular states and communities. Of course they are going to tell their constituents (their bosses) that they have done a good job and deserve to be elected (hired) again. <br /><br />That is how the United States works. If you don't like it then either work to change the system. Which working against NASA, or particular elements withing it is NOT going to do.<br /><br />Either that or you can go to some other country with a different system such as China or Cuba! Do you think that you would have any more influence upon the leaders of those countries?<br /><br />This does not mean that over all benefits of such programs to the US in general should not be considered also. But as NASA IS the NATIONAL Space and Aeronautics Administration then that also happens just as well. Besides, many of the various centers of NASA were established either during or shortly after WWII (long before NASA even existed), and I see not reason to change that. <br /><br />There ARE quite reasonable reasons why most of the centers are where they are.<br /><br />At the very least a portion of this estra funding is being goven to NASA to help stop at least some of the cuts made to the science program, and while I do support the HSF part of NASA I do consider this to be a positive development.<br /><br />I would think that of all people you would consider this to be a positive development, regardless of the politics of the situation!<br />
 
A

arobie

Guest
The Senate wants to give NASA a Billion extra than what it requested? Wow! The world ending. Pigs are flying. <br /><br />Sweet. <br /><br />
 
A

askold

Guest
I do know how the system works and, actually, I have no problem with it. A major part of the job description of a senator (and governor) is to be the lead huckster and shill for their state. The military(federal)-industrial complex is alive and well in America.<br /><br />It would be nice if news reporters knew this too and didn't write articles about senators securing federal funding that clearly benefits their states - with such wide-eyed innocence.
 
F

frodo1008

Guest
A more reasonable position, but then that is not NASA's problem now is it? The reporters you refer to are not NASA's reporters (I don't think that NASA even IS allowed to advertize by its very governmental charter).<br /><br />At least we know the difference, now don't we? <br /><br />
 
N

nyarlathotep

Guest
<font color="yellow">"NASA research shows that "each dollar invested in space programs yields up to nine dollars in new products, technologies and processes on Earth."</font><br /><br />Does that include the ten million dollars they spent on this little bit of research as well?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts