Pelosi says that GOP budget puts ‘women and children last’

The head squealer goes oink! Nancy Pelosi (D-California) said yesterday that the proposed GOP budget would put “women and children last.”

Meanwhile, her assistant squealer, Steny Hoyer, insisted that a government shutdown could only be the fault of the Republicans. According to Hoyer, the Democrats in the Senate are mere bystanders, having nothing to do with any of this at all.

What incompetent idiots.

A retraction

Concerning Obama’s proposals for NASA’s 2012 budget, a closer look by me since yesterday has caused me to reconsider my earlier post. I think I spoke too soon, before I had time to review the Obama budget proposal entirely.

Though the Obama administration has pulled back somewhat from its initial 2011 budget proposals for commercial space, it does appear that they are not abandoning that effort as I had thought at first. Their 2012 proposal ($850 million per year) is still significantly higher than what Congress had authorized ($500 million), which suggests a willingness to fight for this program.

As for the program-formerly-called-Constellation, however, it does appear that this pork program is going forward. Instead of trying to cancel it like last year, the administration now appears to have become resigned to its existence, and this year includes significant funds for its construction.

Regardless, considering the insane state of the federal deficit, it seems to me both unrealistic and foolish to fund either of these programs at this time. Pork politics unfortunately will probably help keep alive the funding for the program-formerly-called-Constellation, while the lack of a powerful constituency for commercial space leaves these subsidizes very vulnerable to Congressional trimming.

Science an Early Budget Winner … But Fight Has Just Begun

Await the squeals from scientists: The journal Science notes the differences between the budget proposals coming from the House Republicans (cutting funds to science) and Obama (increasing funds to science) and hopes for the best. (You can also get a good idea about the increases to science that Obama proposes by going to this ScienceInsider story and scanning down the various articles.) Key quote:

Both conservatives and liberals agree: the main pressure pushing the federal deficit is entitlements; the discretionary budget is dwarfed by mandatory Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security spending. And yet neither the House of Representatives Republican appropriators’ proposal to tackle the deficit starting in 2011 nor Obama’s new budget for next year tackles the real challenge of entitlements. Instead, both pick and choose the discretionary cuts they want to start with.

From my mind, we should accept the cuts from both sides, then go after the entitlements.

In his new budget, Obama kicks the can one more time

Another critical look at Obama’s budget proposal, this time from liberal Dana Milbank at the Washington Post! Key quote:

Obama’s budget proposal is a remarkably weak and timid document. He proposes to cut only $1.1 trillion from federal deficits over the next decade – a pittance when you consider that the deficit this year alone is in the neighborhood of $1.5 trillion. The president makes no serious attempt at cutting entitlement programs that threaten to drive the government into insolvency.

And here’s another: “Steep cuts?” Even the left Is starting to notice.

A clarification of the Obama NASA manned space budget

To avoid confusion, I want to clarify why I consider Obama’s commercial space budget proposal today to be a decrease, not an increase, from past budget proposals. The history of this budget goes like this:

  • In February 2010 Obama proposed to spend $1 billion per year on new commercial space.
  • Congress responded by reducing that budget to $312 million for 2011 and $500 million per year thereafter.
  • The new Obama budget for 2012 proposes to spend $850 million per year for commercial space, more than presently authorized by Congress but less than proposed by Obama only last year.

It is almost certain that Congress will trim these numbers. Meanwhile, the amount of money to the program-formerly-called-Constellation goes up.

A victory for aerospace pork

Update: See my partial retraction here.

The NASA budget announced today by the White House proves how right I was when I stated back on July 8, 2010 that I had no faith in Obama’s new-found commitment to private commercial space. The new budget reduces the funds for private commercial space while putting the bulk of its support behind the unbuildable program-formerly-called Constellation. First read what I wrote in July:

The problem is that I simply do not believe the Obama administration. Everything I have learned about the current President, including the specifics (or lack thereof) of his proposal, tells me that none of his promises are going to be fulfilled. » Read more

Bernanke to Congress: We’re Much Closer to Total Destruction Than You Think

Bernanke to Congress: We’re much closer to total destruction than you think. Key quote:

One way or the other, fiscal adjustments sufficient to stabilize the federal budget must occur at some point. The question is whether these adjustments will take place through a careful and deliberative process that weighs priorities and gives people adequate time to adjust to changes in government programs or tax policies, or whether the needed fiscal adjustments will come as a rapid and painful response to a looming or actual fiscal crisis.

Tea Party freshmen may rue $100B in cuts

Now for some squealing from the “press”: Tea Party freshmen may rue $100B in cuts. I like this comment in response to the story:

Where was the press when Democrats passed $800 billion in useless stimulus? Where were they when unemployment shot up and over the 8% limit Democrats said we would reach without the lame stimulus? They sure jump up when you come up short on $100 billion in cuts…good luck and go after entitlements, please.

New Congress lets expire a decades-old $2.4 billion pork program

Change! The House kills a decades-old $2.4 billion pork program. Key quote:

The Trade Adjustment Assistance program dates back to the Kennedy-era Trade Expansion Act of 1962 and was expanded under the 1974 Trade Act, signed into law by Gerald Ford. It was the kind of bipartisan program thought to be bulletproof. In the last session, it went from a small program, designed to aid workers displaced by foreign trade, to a huge $2.4 billion pork program providing laid-off workers with 156 weeks of “income support,” subsidies and even education.

SpaceX puts Dragon 9 space capsule on display in D.C.

SpaceX has put the Dragon 9 space capsule that flew in space on display in D.C. Though it is really cool that they are making the capsule so available to the public, this quote tells us the real story:

With Congress preparing in the weeks ahead to again address the question of government contracts for commercial space businesses such as SpaceX, the company wanted to give it (and attendees of the nearby FAA Commercial Space Transportation Conference) an opportunity to see the capsule. Members of Congress and of the Obama administration were invited to attend a Thursday evening viewing, and company officials said the response has been enthusiastic.

Cutting the Full $100 Billion

Keep this momentum going! The House Republican leadership was forced this week to increase its proposed budget cuts to $100 billion because of tea party movement pressure, both in the House and back at home. Key quote from this New York Times report:

The reversal was the most concrete demonstration yet that the wave of fiscal conservatives who catapulted Republicans into the House majority is reshaping the political and policy calculations being made by the party leadership.

Great Moments In Government “Investment”

Great moments in government “investment”. Key quote:

To turn wood chips into ethanol fuel, George W. Bush’s Department of Energy in February 2007 announced a $76 million grant to Range Fuels for a cutting-edge refinery. A few months later, the refinery opened in the piney woods of Treutlen County, Ga., as the taxpayers of Georgia piled on another $6 million. In 2008, the ethanol plant was the first beneficiary of the Biorefinery Assistance Program, pocketing a loan for $80 million guaranteed by the U.S. taxpayers.

Last month, the refinery closed down, having failed to squeeze even a drop of ethanol out of its pine chips.

That’s $164 million of tax dollars to a company that produced nothing.

A fresh perspective from the new chairman of the House subcommittee that oversees National Science Foundation (NSF), NASA, the Department of Energy, and the Department of Commerce

Mo Brooks (R-Alabama), the new chairman of the House subcommittee that oversees National Science Foundation (NSF), NASA, the Department of Energy, and the Department of Commerce, gives his perspective on science and the budget. Two quotes of interest:

Q: Do you believe that federal research should be exempt from a rollback in federal spending to 2008 levels?
Brooks: I would love for that to happen. But we just don’t have the money. … We have no choice but to look at everything. If we don’t balance our budget over a short period of time, the federal government is going to collapse and there won’t be money for any of these things. So if we’re going to save money for research and advancement in science, we’re going to have to get our house in order now.

Q: Do you think the government should increase funding on research once things turn around?
Brooks: Do you mean if the budgetary situation turns around? I don’t see that happening in the next 4 to 5 years. We’ve got a $1.5 trillion budget deficit, and Admiral Mullen, head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, has declared it the number one security threat to the country. And if our creditors would cut us off, there would be zero money for national defense or NSF or anything else.

Note how the interviewer, from Science, can’t seem to get his head around the idea of budget cuts.

Q: Is human activity causing global warming?
Brooks: That’s a difficult question to answer because I’ve talked to scientists on both sides of the fence, especially at the University of Alabama at Huntsville. Some say yes, and some say no. I’m also old enough to remember when the same left-wing part of our society was creating a global cooling scare in order to generate funds for their pet projects. So 30-some years ago, the big scare was global cooling, and once they drained the government, they shifted to global warming. So I’m approaching the issue with a healthy degree of skepticism. If the evidence is there to prove it, then so be it.

1 29 30 31 32 33