3 ms·

The NASA Administrator, Charlie Bolden, was nominated by President Obama and confirmed by the United States Senate. NASA is not part of any department but rathe

The NASA Administrator, Charlie Bolden, was nominated by President Obama and confirmed by the United States Senate. NASA is not part of any department but rather reports directly to the President of the United States. https://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/hqlibrary/ic/faqs.html https://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/hqlibrary/ic/faqs.html DARPA is part of a department, the United States Department of Defense. http://www.darpa.mil/ http://www.darpa.mil/ Both NASA and DARPA are as Federal as Federal gets and as govmint as govmint gets. Full disclosure: my daddy worked for NASA on Mercury thru Apollo. He worked for the govmint.

wheelerwj 10y ago
I understand that they are PAID by the federal government. What I'm saying is that they operate INDEPENDENT of the government. They don't have any role in governance, they don't draft or pontificate on legislation, and they don't manage or participate in the daily administration of government affairs. The ONLY thing Federal about them is their funding.
- CalChris 10y ago
  No. NASA and DARPA are managed, funded, directed, controlled, cleared and authorized by the Federal government. There's nothing not Federal about them. And they do not operate independent of the Federal government.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
- mattkrause 10y ago
  Perhaps you're getting mixed up on the nomenclature? There are "independent agencies" in the US Executive Branch, but these aren't independent of the entire US Government; they're just not part of a single Department. For example, NASA could have been part of the Department of Transportation (and thus report to the Secretary of Transportation), but it isn't and reports directly to the President. Agencies are typically run by someone appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate, but the agency heads are typically supposed to be less political than the cabinet. For example, the President can fire the Secretary of State on a whim, and might do so to indicate a policy shift. On the other hand, the members of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, for example, are appointed for fixed five year terms and shouldn't be removed for political reasons. Regardless though, they are still part of the government.

wheelerwj 10y ago

I understand that they are PAID by the federal government. What I'm saying is that they operate INDEPENDENT of the government. They don't have any role in governance, they don't draft or pontificate on legislation, and they don't manage or participate in the daily administration of government affairs. The ONLY thing Federal about them is their funding.

CalChris 10y ago
No. NASA and DARPA are managed, funded, directed, controlled, cleared and authorized by the Federal government. There's nothing not Federal about them. And they do not operate independent of the Federal government.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
mattkrause 10y ago
Perhaps you're getting mixed up on the nomenclature? There are "independent agencies" in the US Executive Branch, but these aren't independent of the entire US Government; they're just not part of a single Department. For example, NASA could have been part of the Department of Transportation (and thus report to the Secretary of Transportation), but it isn't and reports directly to the President. Agencies are typically run by someone appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate, but the agency heads are typically supposed to be less political than the cabinet. For example, the President can fire the Secretary of State on a whim, and might do so to indicate a policy shift. On the other hand, the members of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, for example, are appointed for fixed five year terms and shouldn't be removed for political reasons. Regardless though, they are still part of the government.