The Non-Leadership Act
Six Congressmen have introduced a bill that would have the NASA administrator serve a ten year term, and put the running of the space agency in the hands of an unelected board of directors.
Some details:
» Read more
Tag: budget
The automatic budget cuts triggered by sequestration appear increasingly likely according to two defense analysts.
Good news: The automatic budget cuts triggered by sequestration appear increasingly likely according to two defense analysts.
Now that the Obama administration has released some details on how these 8.2 and 9.4 percent cuts will be imposed, I find them a refreshing change from business-as-usual in Washington. As far as I can tell, the only thing really wrong with them is that they only scratch the surface of the federal budget debt.
Good news: The automatic budget cuts triggered by sequestration appear increasingly likely according to two defense analysts.
Now that the Obama administration has released some details on how these 8.2 and 9.4 percent cuts will be imposed, I find them a refreshing change from business-as-usual in Washington. As far as I can tell, the only thing really wrong with them is that they only scratch the surface of the federal budget debt.
“Sequestration would come at ‘great cost’ to NASA.”
Another whining article about sequestration: “Sequestration would come at ‘great cost’ to NASA.”
Let’s be blunt. An 8.2 percent cut in NASA’s budget will not destroy the agency. It will hurt them, surely, but it will only bring their budget back the agency’s 2005 budget. Considering the deficit and debt, this is hardly a draconian cut.
If the Republicans are serious about getting the budget under control — as they say they are — then these automatic cuts imposed by sequestration should not give them heartburn.
As for the Democrats, no point in caring what they think or do. We already know they aren’t serious about getting the budget under control, considering the budgets Obama has proposed, all of which were rejected unanimously by both Houses of Congress, and the refusal of the Democrats in the Senate to even offer a budget for the past three years.
Another whining article about sequestration: “Sequestration would come at ‘great cost’ to NASA.”
Let’s be blunt. An 8.2 percent cut in NASA’s budget will not destroy the agency. It will hurt them, surely, but it will only bring their budget back the agency’s 2005 budget. Considering the deficit and debt, this is hardly a draconian cut.
If the Republicans are serious about getting the budget under control — as they say they are — then these automatic cuts imposed by sequestration should not give them heartburn.
As for the Democrats, no point in caring what they think or do. We already know they aren’t serious about getting the budget under control, considering the budgets Obama has proposed, all of which were rejected unanimously by both Houses of Congress, and the refusal of the Democrats in the Senate to even offer a budget for the past three years.
Prices, Demand, and SpaceX
For the past three days there has been a very lively debate by readers of Behind the Black, attempting to figure out the actual cost of launching payload to low Earth orbit by various rockets, including SpaceX, the space shuttle, and the NASA-built Space Launch System.
Three stories published today add some new information to this debate.
» Read more
The U.S. government’s credit rating has been downgraded again.
The day of reckoning looms: The U.S. government’s credit rating has been downgraded again.
And we’ve only just begun!
The day of reckoning looms: The U.S. government’s credit rating has been downgraded again.
And we’ve only just begun!
The science cuts from sequestration
The journal Science today published this detailed look at the cuts that would occur in all the federal government’s various science programs should the automatic budget cuts outlined in the sequestration legislation occur on January 2, 2013.
Not surprising, the article includes a great deal of moaning and groaning about the terrible harm the cuts would have on science research should they occur. From the Obama administration:
» Read more
The federal budget deficit has exceeded one trillion dollars for the fourth year in a row.
The day of reckoning looms: The federal budget deficit has now exceeded one trillion dollars for the fourth year in a row.
The day of reckoning looms: The federal budget deficit has now exceeded one trillion dollars for the fourth year in a row.
The Obama administration will miss the legal deadline — from a law he signed only less than a month ago — to provide details on implementing the required budget cuts under sequestration.
The law is such an inconvenient thing: The Obama administration will miss the legal deadline — set by a law he signed only a month ago — to provide details on implementing the required budget cuts under sequestration.
This is only one data point in a long string of data points that have consistently illustrated how disinterested the Obama administration is in dealing with budget issues and the federal debt. And disinterested might be too kind a word. Incompetent also comes to mind.
The law is such an inconvenient thing: The Obama administration will miss the legal deadline — set by a law he signed only a month ago — to provide details on implementing the required budget cuts under sequestration.
This is only one data point in a long string of data points that have consistently illustrated how disinterested the Obama administration is in dealing with budget issues and the federal debt. And disinterested might be too kind a word. Incompetent also comes to mind.
For the 31st time in the past three years the Obama administration warned the public “not to read too much” into this month’s poor job numbers.
Broken record: For the 31st time in the past three years the Obama administration warned the public “not to read too much” into this month’s high unemployment numbers.
Broken record: For the 31st time in the past three years the Obama administration warned the public “not to read too much” into this month’s high unemployment numbers.
We have a choice
A website, ScienceDebate.org, submitted a wide range of questions to Barack Obama and Mitt Romney about their plans for science and technology, and the answers, shown in a side-by-side comparison, are interesting, though in general they demonstrate the ability of politicians to speak for a long time without saying much.
This ability to blather is especially apparent to their answers to the question 12: “What should America’s space exploration and utilization goals be in the 21st century and what steps should the government take to help achieve them?” Neither candidate adds much to what was said in the Republican and Democratic party platforms, making it obvious that neither really cares or knows that much about this subject.
Overall, however, the answers do reveal the basic and fundamental differences between the two candidates, which can be seen in their answers to the very first question about encouraging innovation:
» Read more
The debt of the federal government officially exceeded $16 trillion on Tuesday.
The day of reckoning looms: The debt of the federal government officially exceeded $16 trillion on Tuesday.
The day of reckoning looms: The debt of the federal government officially exceeded $16 trillion on Tuesday.
The Democratic and Republican conventions received $136 million in taxpayer subsidies.
Talk about an inappropriate use of federal funds: The Democratic and Republican conventions received $136 million in taxpayer subsidies.
Talk about an inappropriate use of federal funds: The Democratic and Republican conventions received $136 million in taxpayer subsidies.
Congress wonders why NASA is sending “50 or more” employees to a conference in Italy.
Congress asks NASA why it is sending “50 or more” employees to a conference in Italy.
Congress asks NASA why it is sending “50 or more” employees to a conference in Italy.
The long term credit rating of the United States was lowered today by Standard and Poors.
The day of reckoning looms: The long term credit rating of the United States was lowered today by Standard and Poors.
The downgrade reflects our opinion that the fiscal consolidation plan that Congress and the Administration recently agreed to falls short of what, in our view, would be necessary to stabilize the government’s medium-term debt dynamics. More broadly, the downgrade reflects our view that the effectiveness, stability, and predictability of American policymaking and political institutions have weakened at a time of ongoing fiscal and economic challenges to a degree more than we envisioned when we assigned a negative outlook to the rating on April 18, 2011.
The day of reckoning looms: The long term credit rating of the United States was lowered today by Standard and Poors.
The downgrade reflects our opinion that the fiscal consolidation plan that Congress and the Administration recently agreed to falls short of what, in our view, would be necessary to stabilize the government’s medium-term debt dynamics. More broadly, the downgrade reflects our view that the effectiveness, stability, and predictability of American policymaking and political institutions have weakened at a time of ongoing fiscal and economic challenges to a degree more than we envisioned when we assigned a negative outlook to the rating on April 18, 2011.
Ryan’s speech
If you depend on the conservative commentary about Paul Ryan’s acceptance speech yesterday at the Republican convention to find out how he did, you would have no doubt that this was the greatest and most effective speech since Genesis. To quote just one report:
Paul Ryan’s speech, in two words? Nailed it. Everything that I like (and surmise that others will like as he becomes more and more familiar to them) about Paul Ryan was on perfect display during his half hour-ish on stage. He was intelligent without being intimidating; he was stern and serious but still optimistic and even funny; and he hinted at his wonkiness without getting into jargon and maintained his approachability. But the most beautiful thing about Paul Ryan as the potential vice president of the United States is his uncanny knack for breaking through populist myths and shrill leftist attacks and instead communicating the merits of free-market economics and small government, all without being shrill or polarizing.
Because I’m not spending a lot of time watching these conventions, mostly because they really are nothing more than public relations events staged by both parties, I didn’t see the speech live. After reading reports like the one above, however, I decided late last night to go to youtube and dig up Ryan’s speech and see this amazing performance for myself.
» Read more
It’s the ideology, stupid.
It’s easy to forget, but Republicans swept the 2010 midterms not through a sweeping indictment of Obama’s economic stewardship, but by hammering Congressional Democrats over their support of the president’s health care law, the stimulus and Democrats’ pursuit of a cap-and-trade energy policy. Running on a firmly ideological agenda, House Republicans picked up 63 House seats – a larger pickup for Republicans than in any election since 1946.
What’s remarkable is that all the fundamental indicators from that historic moment have hardly changed – and in some ways, have worsened for the president. The 2010 midterm NBC/Wall Street Journal poll showed 32 percent believing the country was headed in the wrong direction; their latest poll shows that “right track” number exactly the same, with even more believing the country was on the wrong track. Obama’s job approval in the October before the midterm was at 47 percent; it’s only inched upwards to 48 percent in the most recent survey. [emphasis mine]
2010 wasn’t a fluke, it was a trend. And running on the “ideology” of fiscal responsibility, a balanced federal budget, and a smaller federal government does not seem to me to be very ideological. Rather, it is simple common sense, which is why it worked in 2010 and will work again in November.
It’s easy to forget, but Republicans swept the 2010 midterms not through a sweeping indictment of Obama’s economic stewardship, but by hammering Congressional Democrats over their support of the president’s health care law, the stimulus and Democrats’ pursuit of a cap-and-trade energy policy. Running on a firmly ideological agenda, House Republicans picked up 63 House seats – a larger pickup for Republicans than in any election since 1946.
What’s remarkable is that all the fundamental indicators from that historic moment have hardly changed – and in some ways, have worsened for the president. The 2010 midterm NBC/Wall Street Journal poll showed 32 percent believing the country was headed in the wrong direction; their latest poll shows that “right track” number exactly the same, with even more believing the country was on the wrong track. Obama’s job approval in the October before the midterm was at 47 percent; it’s only inched upwards to 48 percent in the most recent survey. [emphasis mine]
2010 wasn’t a fluke, it was a trend. And running on the “ideology” of fiscal responsibility, a balanced federal budget, and a smaller federal government does not seem to me to be very ideological. Rather, it is simple common sense, which is why it worked in 2010 and will work again in November.
Romney, the Republicans, and Space
The Republican Party, as part of their national convention taking place in Florida this week, yesterday released their party platform for the upcoming election campaign.
Normally, I don’t waste my time with party platforms. No one really reads it, and no president ever follows it. Granted, it can give you a general sense of where a party and candidate is headed philosophically, but this is politics. If you think philosophy is their number one priority then I have a bridge in Brooklyn I want to sell you.
However, this document is helpful to us, at least when it comes to the nation’s space effort, as it actually devotes one entire (though short) section on the subject. Considering how vague Mitt Romney has been on what he will do with NASA and space, and how schizophrenic the Republicans in Congress have been, any hint on how they might approach this particular program should they win the election is helpful.
Here is the entire statement of the Republican party platform on the subject of space exploration:
» Read more
More rumors about a year-long mission on ISS
The possibility that NASA might finally agree with Russia’s repeated request to fly a year-long mission to ISS grew stronger this morning with two stories:
- NASA gets set for yearlong stints on space station
- A year on the ISS: Good for tourists – and science
The first, by James Oberg, digs into the underworld of NASA politics to find that plans might very well be more advanced than NASA is letting on:
» Read more
The war on children
Romney’s energy policy proposal announced today would redirect science funding towards basic research.
Mitt Romney’s energy policy proposal, announced today, would redirect science funding towards basic research, according to this mostly positive analysis from the generally liberal journal Science.
Personally I’d like to get the federal government out of all this. Let the private market decide where the money should be spent for research. Moreover, we still have that federal debt to pay off. Where will Romney get the money?
Mitt Romney’s energy policy proposal, announced today, would redirect science funding towards basic research, according to this mostly positive analysis from the generally liberal journal Science.
Personally I’d like to get the federal government out of all this. Let the private market decide where the money should be spent for research. Moreover, we still have that federal debt to pay off. Where will Romney get the money?
A thank you letter to President Obama.
The Congressional Budget Office yesterday projected this year’s deficit will be $1.1 trillion dollars, making it the fourth year in a row that the deficit has broken the trillion dollar ceiling
The day of reckoning looms: The Congressional Budget Office yesterday projected this year’s deficit to be $1.1 trillion dollars, making it the fourth year in a row that the deficit has broken the trillion dollar ceiling.
In the entire history of the U.S. the deficit never exceeded one trillion dollars, until Barack Obama became president. In fact, it never came close until Obama arrived.
The day of reckoning looms: The Congressional Budget Office yesterday projected this year’s deficit to be $1.1 trillion dollars, making it the fourth year in a row that the deficit has broken the trillion dollar ceiling.
In the entire history of the U.S. the deficit never exceeded one trillion dollars, until Barack Obama became president. In fact, it never came close until Obama arrived.
NASA can put a man on the Moon and a rover on Mars, but somehow it can’t comply with a Freedom of Information document request.
NASA can put a man on the Moon and a rover on Mars, but somehow it can’t comply with a Freedom of Information document request.
The request was an attempt by a newspaper to find out if NASA officials have been partying extravagantly at conferences, like officials in GSA. That NASA can’t provide the documents suggests that something stinks somewhere.
NASA can put a man on the Moon and a rover on Mars, but somehow it can’t comply with a Freedom of Information document request.
The request was an attempt by a newspaper to find out if NASA officials have been partying extravagantly at conferences, like officials in GSA. That NASA can’t provide the documents suggests that something stinks somewhere.
The modern leftwing disconnect from reality.
The modern leftwing disconnect from reality.
[L]ast week a man called Floyd Corkins shot another man called Leo Johnson, the security guard at the Family Research Council, a “conservative” group, according to the muted media coverage, or a “hate group,” according to the Southern Poverty Law Center, who spray that term around like champagne on a NASCAR podium. Mr. Corkins, an “LGBT volunteer,” told his victim, “I don’t like your politics.” In his backpack, he had one box of ammunition and 15 Chick-fil-A sandwiches. Had he had one Chick-fil-A sandwich and 15 boxes of ammunition, he might have done more damage. Or then again perhaps not, given that, as bloggers Kathy Shaidle and “the Phantom” pointed out, he reached his target and then started “monologuing,” as they say in The Incredibles….
I’m not blaming Floyd Corkins’s actions on the bullying twerps at the Southern Poverty Law Center or those thug Democrat mayors who tried to run Chick-fil-A out of Boston and Chicago. But I do think he’s the apotheosis of narcissistic leftist myopia. He symbolizes that exhaustion of the other possibilities — the dwindling down of latter-day liberalism to ever more self-indulgent distractions from the hard truths of a broke and ruined landscape. Our elites have sunk into a boutique decadence of moral preening entirely disconnected from reality: A non-homophobic chicken in every pot, an abortifacient dispenser in every Catholic university, a high-speed-rail corridor between every two bankrupt California municipalities.
Read the whole thing. Steyn once again notes the bankruptcy of modern liberalism and the Democratic Party, which — unless the American public rejects it — will lead to the bankruptcy of our country and probably the world.
The modern leftwing disconnect from reality.
[L]ast week a man called Floyd Corkins shot another man called Leo Johnson, the security guard at the Family Research Council, a “conservative” group, according to the muted media coverage, or a “hate group,” according to the Southern Poverty Law Center, who spray that term around like champagne on a NASCAR podium. Mr. Corkins, an “LGBT volunteer,” told his victim, “I don’t like your politics.” In his backpack, he had one box of ammunition and 15 Chick-fil-A sandwiches. Had he had one Chick-fil-A sandwich and 15 boxes of ammunition, he might have done more damage. Or then again perhaps not, given that, as bloggers Kathy Shaidle and “the Phantom” pointed out, he reached his target and then started “monologuing,” as they say in The Incredibles….
I’m not blaming Floyd Corkins’s actions on the bullying twerps at the Southern Poverty Law Center or those thug Democrat mayors who tried to run Chick-fil-A out of Boston and Chicago. But I do think he’s the apotheosis of narcissistic leftist myopia. He symbolizes that exhaustion of the other possibilities — the dwindling down of latter-day liberalism to ever more self-indulgent distractions from the hard truths of a broke and ruined landscape. Our elites have sunk into a boutique decadence of moral preening entirely disconnected from reality: A non-homophobic chicken in every pot, an abortifacient dispenser in every Catholic university, a high-speed-rail corridor between every two bankrupt California municipalities.
Read the whole thing. Steyn once again notes the bankruptcy of modern liberalism and the Democratic Party, which — unless the American public rejects it — will lead to the bankruptcy of our country and probably the world.
Facing tight budgets, a National Science Foundation panel has recommended the shuttering of five major ground-based telescopes.
Facing tight budgets, a National Science Foundation panel has recommended the shuttering of five major ground-based telescopes.
Stay tuned for loud screams of outrage. However, some of these facilities have not been very useful for years. Consider the Robert C. Byrd Green Bank Radio Telescope. It was only rebuilt after it collapsed in 1988 because of the political clout of Senator Robert Byrd. By the time that reconstruction was finished, a process that took more than 20 years, the telescope was completely obsolete. Though it has done some good science, it is far outmatched by other radio telescope arrays.
Many of the facilities are funded merely due to bureaucratic and political inertia. For the astronomical community to be willing to recognize this is a good thing, for which they should be lauded.
Facing tight budgets, a National Science Foundation panel has recommended the shuttering of five major ground-based telescopes.
Stay tuned for loud screams of outrage. However, some of these facilities have not been very useful for years. Consider the Robert C. Byrd Green Bank Radio Telescope. It was only rebuilt after it collapsed in 1988 because of the political clout of Senator Robert Byrd. By the time that reconstruction was finished, a process that took more than 20 years, the telescope was completely obsolete. Though it has done some good science, it is far outmatched by other radio telescope arrays.
Many of the facilities are funded merely due to bureaucratic and political inertia. For the astronomical community to be willing to recognize this is a good thing, for which they should be lauded.
Contrasting Paul Ryan with Barack Obama.
Contrasting Paul Ryan with Barack Obama.
The next month, both [budget] plans came to a vote in the Senate. Ryan’s budget lost on a party-line vote; Obama’s lost 0-97. Erskine Bowles, a former chief of staff to Bill Clinton, and Obama’s own appointee to the deficit-control panel whose recommendations Obama completely ignored in that budget proposal, told a University of North Carolina audience in September 2011 that Ryan had proposed “a sensible, straightforward, serious budget and it cut the budget deficit by $4 trillion.” In contrast, Bowles told the audience, “I don’t think anyone took [Obama’s] budget very seriously.”
In February 2012, Obama proposed yet another unserious budget that ignored all of the realities of our short- and long-term fiscal shortfalls, with yet another trillion-dollar deficit. Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner tried to tell Ryan and the House Budget Committee that Obama’s budget proposal would “stabilize” the deficits. This time, Ryan only needed four minutes to dismantle that argument, showing that Obama’s long-term budget only “stabilized” deficits for a decade, after which they escalated out of control — unlike Ryan’s long-term budget reforms, which solved the problem of escalating costs. “We’re not coming before you to say we have a definitive solution to our long-term problem,” Geithner finally exclaimed. “What we do know is we don’t like yours.”
Bluntly put, Obama has never been willing to propose anything that might solve the federal budget disaster, while Ryan has at least made an attempt.
Contrasting Paul Ryan with Barack Obama.
The next month, both [budget] plans came to a vote in the Senate. Ryan’s budget lost on a party-line vote; Obama’s lost 0-97. Erskine Bowles, a former chief of staff to Bill Clinton, and Obama’s own appointee to the deficit-control panel whose recommendations Obama completely ignored in that budget proposal, told a University of North Carolina audience in September 2011 that Ryan had proposed “a sensible, straightforward, serious budget and it cut the budget deficit by $4 trillion.” In contrast, Bowles told the audience, “I don’t think anyone took [Obama’s] budget very seriously.”
In February 2012, Obama proposed yet another unserious budget that ignored all of the realities of our short- and long-term fiscal shortfalls, with yet another trillion-dollar deficit. Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner tried to tell Ryan and the House Budget Committee that Obama’s budget proposal would “stabilize” the deficits. This time, Ryan only needed four minutes to dismantle that argument, showing that Obama’s long-term budget only “stabilized” deficits for a decade, after which they escalated out of control — unlike Ryan’s long-term budget reforms, which solved the problem of escalating costs. “We’re not coming before you to say we have a definitive solution to our long-term problem,” Geithner finally exclaimed. “What we do know is we don’t like yours.”
Bluntly put, Obama has never been willing to propose anything that might solve the federal budget disaster, while Ryan has at least made an attempt.
“inadequate oversight, lax bookkeeping, sloppy paperwork, haphazard performance agreements and missing financial documentation.”
An inspector general’s report of the State Department’s climate change office has uncovered “inadequate oversight, lax bookkeeping, sloppy paperwork, haphazard performance agreements and missing financial documentation.”
Other than that, the Obama administration’s management of its climate research budget is just fine.
An inspector general’s report of the State Department’s climate change office has uncovered “inadequate oversight, lax bookkeeping, sloppy paperwork, haphazard performance agreements and missing financial documentation.”
Other than that, the Obama administration’s management of its climate research budget is just fine.
“I’ll just tell you the truth.”
A rarity today among Democrats: “I’ll just tell you the truth.”
And what is that truth? Democrat Erskine Bowles reveals the reason why the recommendations of his deficit commission went nowhere.
A rarity today among Democrats: “I’ll just tell you the truth.”
And what is that truth? Democrat Erskine Bowles reveals the reason why the recommendations of his deficit commission went nowhere.
Tomorrow will mark 1200 days since the Senate, led by the Democrats, passed a budget.
Time to party! Tomorrow will mark 1200 days since the Senate, led by the Democrats, passed their last budget.
Time to party! Tomorrow will mark 1200 days since the Senate, led by the Democrats, passed their last budget.
“Ignore the political prophets of doom – this is a golden age for the world.”
“Ignore the prophets of doom – this is a golden age for the world.”
Take global poverty, a subject we have heard plenty about from ministers justifying the £9 billion overseas aid budget. Britain has signed up to the so-called Millennium Development Goals, set in 2000 and accompanied by sermons from Gordon Brown about the “arc of the moral universe” bending towards justice. It was the beginning of boom times for the overseas aid industry, despite its woeful track record. The first goal was to halve the proportion of the world’s population living on a dollar a day by 2015 – an undeniably noble aim.
Earlier this year, the World Bank made an astonishing discovery: the target had actually been met in 2008, seven years ahead of schedule. This staggering achievement received no fanfare, perhaps because the miracle had not been created by Western governments but by the economic progress of China and India. Their embrace of capitalism had invited a flow of trade and investment, which was not halted by the crash. Capitalism meant that houses replaced mud huts and vast swathes of the Third World rose from their agrarian knees. British consumers buying cheap shirts in Asda were, in a very real sense, helping to make poverty history. [emphasis mine]
In other words, poor countries became wealthy by embracing freedom, not centralized government rule.
Sadly, the United States still faces economic disaster, and that is because, in the past half century, our culture abandoned its principles of freedom and capitalism and instead put our faith in big government. The result: we now face bankruptcy and economic collapse.
“Ignore the prophets of doom – this is a golden age for the world.”
Take global poverty, a subject we have heard plenty about from ministers justifying the £9 billion overseas aid budget. Britain has signed up to the so-called Millennium Development Goals, set in 2000 and accompanied by sermons from Gordon Brown about the “arc of the moral universe” bending towards justice. It was the beginning of boom times for the overseas aid industry, despite its woeful track record. The first goal was to halve the proportion of the world’s population living on a dollar a day by 2015 – an undeniably noble aim.
Earlier this year, the World Bank made an astonishing discovery: the target had actually been met in 2008, seven years ahead of schedule. This staggering achievement received no fanfare, perhaps because the miracle had not been created by Western governments but by the economic progress of China and India. Their embrace of capitalism had invited a flow of trade and investment, which was not halted by the crash. Capitalism meant that houses replaced mud huts and vast swathes of the Third World rose from their agrarian knees. British consumers buying cheap shirts in Asda were, in a very real sense, helping to make poverty history. [emphasis mine]
In other words, poor countries became wealthy by embracing freedom, not centralized government rule.
Sadly, the United States still faces economic disaster, and that is because, in the past half century, our culture abandoned its principles of freedom and capitalism and instead put our faith in big government. The result: we now face bankruptcy and economic collapse.