This is not a NASA Website. You might learn something. It's YOUR space agency. Get involved. Take it back. Make it work - for YOU.
Budget

Refusing to Answer Simple Budget Questions

By Keith Cowing
NASA Watch
February 13, 2012
Filed under , , ,

Why Did NASA’s Administrator Refuse To Answer a Simple Budget Question – At A Budget Briefing?
“NASA held a press briefing today regarding the FY 2013 budget. What’s rather troubling is how little budget information NASA Administrator Bolden Charlie Bolden actually discussed and how many substantive questions he dodged during this briefing. The most blatant example was when Bolden was asked if he could list the projects and missions that were cut in order to pay for James Webb Space Telescope overruns.”

NASA Watch founder, Explorers Club Fellow, ex-NASA, Away Teams, Journalist, Space & Astrobiology, Lapsed climber.

23 responses to “Refusing to Answer Simple Budget Questions”

  1. no one of consequence says:
    0
    0

    Yeah, right. So he relates the horse trading  with Congressman X to have this but not that, given only that Congresswoman Y will do Z following …

    I feel sorry for anyone who has to do this. I have my bones to pick with him for sure, but there’s no way anyone in this position can easily answer this.

    So, how to get your reasonable question answered? My guess would be having all the players (legislative and executive) present, then address the question to the affected parties (policy makers of the constituencies affected) by a specific funding “split” – until you got an answer. Then go back to the administrator and ask him if this is reasonable against agency’s mission/needs – “yes or no”.

    If you don’t get a immediate “yes” then its really a “no”. There, you got your answer.

    If you could do this, you’d get the transparency you’d desire. I’d like that.

    With all our communications technology nowadays, there’s probably a way to do this…

  2. rfsimpson2 says:
    0
    0

    He’s not going to answer that question because it isn’t a happy question and doesn’t have a happy answer. How about his response to being pressed on “is there any change in the wind that will put a stop to cost overruns and schedule slips?” Did you hear? “Joint Confidence Level;” another commission I suppose.

  3. watchpuppy says:
    0
    0

    Bolden does not run the Agency, the CFO’s runs the Agency including all the Centers.  The CFO makes decisions on what facilities are cut, what programs are funded, and where cuts are going to be taken.

    • rfsimpson2 says:
      0
      0

      Disagree, this CFO manages the budget flow down and that’s it. Congress runs the Agency

      • anwatkins says:
        0
        0

        Actually rfsimpson, technically NASA is an executive agency so is “run” by the president.  However, that is now just semantics with Congress holding the purse strings and using such tools as unfunded earmarks and pork politics to ensure that cash cows like JWST stay funded.

        • Steve Whitfield says:
          0
          0

          anwatkins,

          Huh?  How on Earth, or off, do you consider JWST to be a cash cow?  It’s exactly the opposite, a long-term liability; it earns no income, it only costs.  Even from the perspective of the contractor(s) it’s not a cc, since it is still underfunded.  This does not compute.

          Steve

          • anwatkins says:
            0
            0

            You are right Steve.  I was not paying too much attention when I wrote this and meant cash sink.  Definitely not cash cow.

      • Brett Weeks says:
        0
        0

         Right now OMB is running the Agency.  They are burrowing into  Congressional appropriations and telling the Agency what it can and cannot do with the money.

  4. Grandpa_Dave says:
    0
    0

    “Either he doesn’t know the answers or …”

    Well, look who’s in the White house. Either he doesn’t know
    the answers or he’s got an agenda to bring down the Constitutional Republic. After
    all, as Joe-the-Plumber learned, we need to redistribute the wealth. Four more
    years will tell. — Comrade Grandpa

  5. sshamba says:
    0
    0

    Great to see how the Democratic education and science president is hamstringing the premier science institution of this country. Say what you will about the Republicans, they never went after NASA like this. Now instead we are going to spend billions of money on high speed trains that are going to connect Fresno to Bakersfield. I am glad I left JPL  beginning of the year. I knew things were going to be bad but this is one for the books. Charlie Bolden is a puppet and Lori Garver is the one pulling the strings. I wish NASA could have an administrator with the vision and the backbone to lead it out of the mess that it finds itself today. Unfortunately, Charlie Bolden, like Obama, is just a pretty face with no ability to bring the agency through this crisis. Most of the people at JPL voted for Obama now they are getting stabbed in the back.

    • adastramike says:
      0
      0

      I agree. What kind of games is this administration playing? Why attack the Mars program, when it’s had such high returns in terms of science and public enthusiasm? Yes MSL was delayed and went somewhat over budget. But We’re ending a war and yet can’t afford to maintain our Mars program? How many careers will be cut short because of this stupid idea on behalf of Bolden and Garver? Bolden is just a puppet; he would justify and praise the shutting down of even more of NASA and call it bold and visionary. What next, privatize the Mars program to justify cutting the funding even more? If this lunatic wins again, what will stop him from terminating the Mars program, saying it doesn’t contribute to the equalizing of wealth?

    • Craig Levin says:
      0
      0

      So it wasn’t Nixon who killed off Apollo?

      • Paul Spudis says:
        0
        0

        No, it was not.

        NASA cancelled Saturn 5
        production in August 1968, nearly a year before the first human walked on the moon.

        http://www.spacelaunchrepor

        I believe that the President at the time was one Lyndon Baines Johnson.

        • Steve Whitfield says:
          0
          0

          That’s how I remember it, too.  Johnson had done what Kennedy commited them to, and then LBJ had a no-win war and his new social programs to pay for.

          Steve

      • no one of consequence says:
        0
        0

        Nixon curtailed the remaining Apollo missions on already built Saturn 5’s.

        Nixon / Fletcher made the TAOS development compromise on Shuttle which had far reaching effects that kept/keeps the US from returning to the Moon IMHO.

      • Nassau Goi says:
        0
        0

         The more pressing fact is that despite 50 yrs of manned spaceflight, some of you political morons have contributed zero to making making maned spaceflight sustainable.

        NASA programs get the budget axe often because often the agency is an easy political target with small repercussion.

        Ofcourse, unless those programs happen to be in TX, AL or FL. We have loudmouth morons at JSC that believe humans and dinosaurs lived together, while at MSFC engine designers are excited and busy producing that “Rocket City Rednecks” rather than anything worthwhile.

        The reason JPL programs get scrapped instead because the politicians would have to put up with relection threats from whiney entitled employees and networked good ole boys around NASA centers in TX, FL and AL. They couldn’t axe Constellation outright, no matter ill conceived, wasteful and in sustainable it was. That is why other centers like JPL get programs cut, they more often than not take it like a civilized population.

        Mind you JPL puts out products that exceed their expectations.  Voyager, Mars Rovers, etc…. Usually a good investment.

        You guys blame the voters and politicians for making a political call. I blame the source of the drain, wannabe engineers that should have nothing to do with Manned spaceflight… something at the forefront of humanity. Not all, but far too many around those centers can only push humanity back and stall technological advance.

        The nerve of anyone blaming JPL employees for getting programs cut, even by vote. That center has largely carried the agency for the past few years. If it wasn’t for SpaceX, which is based in “liberal” California mind you, China would be the only hope of sustainable manned spaceflight.

        A handful of Constellation or SLS flights doesn’t count as a long term solution and it’s not even a near term solution. It does pad the wallets of aerospace stock holders pretty well though.

        Yeah, it’s the President ‘s fault alright. You guys are obviously geniuses able to lead humans to great things…too bad your bound by politicians.

  6. tsal75 says:
    0
    0

    All this wringing of the hands and righteous indignation over nothing. The President’s budget is meaningless since it will go nowhere in Congress. Any House budget that gets introduced will be meaningless since it won’t pass the Senate, and any Senate budget will be meaningless since it won’t pass the House. Our childish representatives in Congress will be so wrapped up in raising money and getting themselves re-elected that they will kick the can down the road with a Continuing Resolution, and things will pretty much carry on as is. As depressing as that is, maybe it’s the best outcome.

  7. OrbChaser says:
    0
    0

    What is even more disgusting is 470 million for ‘SPOC pension liability’.  Why are you not crying about that?  Over half a billion dollars down a hole because United Space Alliance underfunded its pension and stuck NASA with the bill?  This is the size of Solyndra, yet the MSM is letting that one slide.

    • Yusef says:
      0
      0

      I’ll take my money, thank you very much…

      Not our fault. And given the fact that NASA’s sorry project management skills and complete lack of leadership which lead to most of us being sent to the streets, serves ’em right.

  8. Steve Whitfield says:
    0
    0

    Some weird opinions in this thread, in my opinion.

    I think it’s safe to say that Bolden simply doesn’t know the final answers to questions relating to a process that is still very much ongoing.  When the circus is finished and the last of the budget discussions is published (months from now?), then Bolden will be able to answer questions like which Mars programs are cut because of JWST (if that is ever really figured out).  In the mean time, if he gives what looks like the best current answer, now matter how carefully qualified he makes it, when it changes later the press will say either he lied or he was clueless. When you’re in a no-win situation, say nothing committal, specially when it’s a very public situation.  He would have been reckless to have given an answer.  At best, he might have said, We don’t know for certain yet, it’s an ongoing process; and he probably would have been attacked for that, too.

    I really believe that if any of Bolden’s free-speaking critics had to spend a week doing his job they’d have a lot less to say afterward.

    Steve

    • no one of consequence says:
      0
      0

       Steve,
      Yes. No win.

      Bolden has gotten better in avoiding gaffs. My read was earlier he was trying too hard to be responsive to a more critical audience than what he was used to. Note that everyone’s still just as harsh with him no matter if he does better. Sucks but that’s DC.

      But when you’re the “big boss” you’re always the big target for everyone’s issue. Regardless.

      But I think the point of getting answers to questions in a democracy is important. What most don’t realize is that there are others –  policy makers – behind the answers. They need to be supplying the answer “in the context of the question asked”.

  9. Rusty says:
    0
    0

    Keith,  I’ve been reading your posts for years and I truly wish somehow, someway the powers that be would hire you to overhaul NASA’s PAO activities and force them to get past the politics and do what is best for the organization.  Your website clearly shows how NASA has failed as an organization and cannot even accomplish simple tasks of keeping us civilians informed of activites happening at the various centers (which the PAOs fail miserably).  Its really unbelievable how embarrassing NASA has become and I find the PAO’s to be completely out in left field as they seem pretty incompetent in their jobs let alone the entire NASA administrator staff.

    I wish someone would allow you to cleanup at least the PAO staff!  We, your readers, believe you understand what needs to be distributed and you know how it should be done.  I just wish NASA would see that.

    Keep up the good work!!

  10. mfwright says:
    0
    0

    Boy, I could spend years just reading and analyzing budgets. If I could wave the magic wand, I’d like to hear what Bolden and Garver really think about the NASA budget and why certain decisions were made. I feel they really cannot say what is on thier minds much like the president cannot say what’s on his mind (diplomacy, secrets, etc.), which is too bad because vast majority of us get our info from third party sources (i.e. forums, articles). Much of it gets distorted through the translations. It seems trying to find out what is really going on is like studying biological organisms to find out what makes them tick.