Senate Appropriators Seek to Cut Commercial Crew Further
NASA Administrator Statement on Senate Appropriations Subcommittee Vote on Commercial Crew Budget
“I am deeply disappointed that the Senate Appropriations subcommittee does not fully support NASA’s plan to once again launch American astronauts from U.S. soil as soon as possible, and instead favors continuing to write checks to Russia. Remarkably, the Senate reduces funding for our Commercial Crew Program further than the House already does compared to the President’s Budget. By gutting this program and turning our backs on U.S. industry, NASA will be forced to continue to rely on Russia to get its astronauts to space and continue to invest hundreds of millions of dollars into the Russian economy rather than our own.”
Senate Bill Offers $18.3 Billion For NASA, Space News
“A spending bill approved by a Senate appropriations subcommittee June 10 would provide $18.3 billion for NASA in fiscal year 2016, a cut of more than $200 million from both the administration’s original request and a companion House bill. … Commercial crew, however, would receive $900 million in the bill, $344 million less than requested. Space technology is funded at $600 million, $125 million less than requested.”
Senate Appropriations CJS Subcommittee Approves Less than Requested for NASA, Space Policy Online
“Sen. Bill Nelson (D-FL) voiced his objections to the $344 million cut to commercial crew on the Senate floor following the markup. He said if the cut is sustained, it will delay the ability to launch American astronauts on American rockets two more years, which means paying Russia for two more years, costing at least as much. “We need to wake up to what’s happening,” he implored, adding that Mikulski will offer an amendment tomorrow to restore the commercial crew funding and urging his fellow Senators to support it.”
Nelson floor remarks, YouTube
No doubt these are the same congress people that blame NASA for not replacing the shuttle faster with a US alternative. Well you get what you pay for.
In other news, it’s full speed ahead for Porklifter 1.
http://netstorage.discovery…
Unbelievable! As Keith has correctly pointed out, as our Russian partners become more and more unreliable we are delaying our best, cheapest, and most reliable space program.
I have always said that the fault of not being out of low earth orbit since the early 1970s was a bipartisan effort by both parties. However between being against earth satellites, forbidding cooperation with other countries in space, and delaying commercial crew; it is starting to look like the republicans are the most anti-space.
This is a Senator Richard Shelby blue light special in aisle number one. Seriously, I am a Republican and I have no idea why Republicans are so damn stupid when it comes to commercial crew. I mean, not even the House is this stupid.
Do you want to continue to rely on the Russians for rides to ISS? Do you want to continue to pay 100s of millions to the Russians to fly our astronauts?
How much Boeing and Lockheed money did it take to fanegle this one?
Republicans always want to claim Mom, NASA, and apple pie but they sure know how to eat the whole damn pie, kill mom, and gut NASA.
Just sickening.
Remember, Boeing is one of the two companies building commercial crew, and Boeing/Lockmart are the parent companies of ULA, also with a stake in commercial crew.
This is coming from somewhere else.
Hmmm. Don’t want to buy their rocket engines, but willing to send our people up on them? Surely the State dept should say no! So no astronauts on ISS? Politics – a waste of time.
I wonder Senator Shelby and rest of Republicans realize they are help supporting President Vladimir V. Putin and cronies 500 millions dollars. Instead they should be supporting SpaceX and Boeing to create lots of jobs in US instead of Russia jobs totally stupid!
.. and by “cut” you mean Congress will give NASA more money for commercial crew than they had last year. This is the new math. Billy gets $1/week allowance. He asks for an increase to $5/week. His parents increase his allowance to $2/week. By how much has Billy’s allowance been cut?
Commercial crew was only awarded late last year. The big payout for actual services now begins. It is like getting thru high school and then entering as a freshman into college. It costs more to go to college. But if, right when you sign up for your first class, suddenly a huge chunk of your tuition money is pulled away it is a CUT, even if you are still spending more than last year.
Nonsense. The administration has completely failed to negotiate funding for this program and now they’re whining that Congress is doing their job. When asked why they were funding two different providers to do the job (and one provider to NOT do the job), Bolden mumbled incoherently about “competition”, but there is no competition. Boeing and SpaceX are both being guaranteed launches. SNC and Blue Origin got paid to produce work that won’t even be used by NASA. It’s a complete farce and the Congress sees it.
No attainment of milestones = No payment. It’s the new “guarantee”.
It is not so much competition as having assured access. As was seen in the commercial cargo system, the problems with one vendor did not stop all deliveries.
btw, calling the comments of another poster “nonsense” is not useful, and harmful to open dialog.
True dat, Yale, but characterizing someone’s (incomplete) argument as ‘nonsensical’ is fair play, and that’s exactly how I’d describe Q’s point.
What a shame we don’t live in a black and white world where folks can just swoop in and make pronouncements. Commercial Crew is a complex issue and nobody is getting a free ride.
We’re quibbling on the wording, but the fact is that by not fully funding Commercial Crew, we’re risking causing delays in the program. In a false attempt to “save money”, NASA will have to spend more in future years by paying CASH to Russia for more Soyuz flights. This is what my grandfather would have called penny wise, but pound foolish.
Furthermore, given the current political situation with Russia and the recent Progress failure and the recent Soyuz uncommanded thruster firing, one would think that Commercial Crew would have gotten their full funding request. Russia has become an unreliable space station partner both politically and technically.
That’s actually a fairly strong statement from Gen. Bolden, most likely because Pres. Obama is nearing the end of his term.
Obama has threatened to veto this. He has only vetoed a bill 4 times before I think. Least vetos of any president ever. There is much here he doesn’t like. Sure hope he comes to rescue on this one.
DTARS, part of the reason there are only 4 vetoes is because this President has also had the least amount of bills presented to him to sign. You can point that right at a dysfunctional Congress.
Not the least of any president ever:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wik…
But it is the least by any president since the 1880s.
“I am deeply disappointed that the Senate Appropriations subcommittee does not fully support NASA’s plan to once again launch American astronauts from U.S. soil as soon as possible, and instead favors continuing to write checks to Russia.”
No, they always have the option to stop sending people to ISS for good. Instead, according to the administration, the real urgent mission for NASA is to send humans to some unknown asteroid.
As a conservative and nominal Republican, I find this situation intolerable: the Dems are supporting the private/free-market solution and the Repubs are supporting the gov’t solution … sort of.
I guess the “all politics is local” adage applies here.
I’m finding it impossible to see the logic behind cutting Commercial Crew funding.
…I reallt want to punch Congress right now.