7 ms·

NASA budget would cut Earth science and education

76 points by jskinger 10y ago

tbomb 10y ago
On the bright side, that's much less of a budget cut than what I was expecting!
- finid 10y ago
  So how deep of a cut were you expecting?
DoodleBuggy 10y ago
Who needs science and education?
- simonh 10y ago
  Not hotel and casino operators, apparently.
  - SketchySeaBeast 10y ago
    I guess the theory is you can't be too poor to gamble?
ocschwar 10y ago
One of those gadgets is designed to measure refraction and radiance from greenhouse gasses. I.e. to confirm or correct the only assumptions in climate modeling that are even remotely controversial. Gee, I wonder why they want to cancel it.
hackuser 10y ago
The Dept of Education budget also is proposed to be cut significantly, including deep cuts in financial aid to college students. NIH research also is proposed to suffer large cuts. And while I'm at it, the National Endowment for the Arts and National Endowment for the Humanities are proposed to be eliminated entirely.
- Finnucane 10y ago
  Yeah, basically, if it doesn't involve killing people or the police state, it's getting a cut. Unfortunately, the language I would use to describe my feelings about this is probably not considered appropriate for HN.
  - Arizhel 10y ago
    Yes, but it's also important to realize that this is the will of the American people. They voted for this; they voted for this Administration, and they voted for this Congress.
    - knz 10y ago
      The popular vote would disagree with this sentiment in regards to voting for this administration.... If the will of the people was a consideration then we would see a more balanced proposal without such severe cuts to agencies and programs that Trump associates with "liberals". Abolishing the NEA or destroying the ability of the EPA to regulate pollution is pure political ideology. Reducing the ability of our government to study climate change isn't based upon scientific fact - it's done because it doesn't fit within the worldview of our current administration.
      - Arizhel 10y ago
        The popular vote wasn't that far away; it never is, or else the election would have gone the other way. The Electoral College gives extra weight to votes in smaller states, but only so much. That's why I pointed out that the people voted for this Congress, not just this Administration. They voted GOP not only for the House, but for the Senate too, so you can't even make any claims about "gerrymandering". They even voted GOP for governorships and local elections. The bottom line: outside of a few particular places (namely California), the people of this country want the GOP and its policies. As for your "balanced proposal" idea, things don't work like that. When one party has total power in both Congress and the White House, they can do pretty much whatever they want. If the people had wanted more balance, they would have voted for a more balanced Congress. They didn't. They overwhelmingly filled the seats with GOP candidates.
ntaylor 10y ago
It's worth noting that the actual impact to NASA's budget is relatively small. Down to 19.1bn from 19.3bn.
- donpdonp 10y ago
  Yes, -1% for NASA in the proposal. The EPA is what gets hit hard - listed as -31%. Also worth noting: "Discretionary spending limits, addressed by this proposal, are set by congressional budget resolutions. Congress typically makes changes to the president’s proposal — last year, lawmakers disregarded Obama’s budget altogether. " https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/politics/trump-presidential-budget-2018-proposal/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/politics/trump-presi...
heifetz 10y ago
Since Bannon is preparing for a nuclear winter, anything other than defense and military spending is non-essential.
Mythanar 10y ago
I am professionally involved in space tech. Have to say, I like Trump's administration stance on NASA (quote): "We see NASA in an exploration role, in deep space research," Bob Walker, a senior Trump adviser, told the Guardian newspaper. "Earth-centric science is better placed at other agencies where it is their prime mission." ...much more then I liked the previous administrator (Charles Bolden) mission: "When I became the NASA administrator, (President Obama) charged me with three things," Bolden said in the interview which aired last week. "One, he wanted me to help re-inspire children to want to get into science and math; he wanted me to expand our international relationships; and third, and perhaps foremost, he wanted me to find a way to reach out to the Muslim world and engage much more with dominantly Muslim nations to help them feel good about their historic contribution to science, math and engineering." Why were Muslim national relationships a NASA mission? Thought we had State Department for that.
- bhhaskin 10y ago
  It makes perfect sense to move earth sciences to other agencies. NOAA should be taking point.
  - knz 10y ago
    Are NOAA getting that additional responsibility and associated funding? Also, NASA's charter is much more broad than just space exploration. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Aeronautics_and_Space_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Aeronautics_and_Space... "The original 1958 act charged the new Agency with conducting the aeronautical and space activities of the United States "so as to contribute materially to one or more of the following objectives:" - The expansion of human knowledge of phenomena in the atmosphere and space; - The improvement of the usefulness, performance, speed, safety, and efficiency of aeronautical and space vehicles; - The development and operation of vehicles capable of carrying instruments, equipment, supplies and living organisms through space; - The establishment of long-range studies of the potential benefits to be gained from, the opportunities for, and the problems involved in the utilization of aeronautical and space activities for peaceful and scientific purposes. - The preservation of the role of the United States as a leader in aeronautical and space science and technology and in the application thereof to the conduct of peaceful activities within and outside the atmosphere. - The making available to agencies directly concerned with national defenses of discoveries that have military value or significance, and the furnishing by such agencies, to the civilian agency established to direct and control nonmilitary aeronautical and space activities, of information as to discoveries which have value or significance to that agency; - Cooperation by the United States with other nations and groups of nations in work done pursuant to this Act and in the peaceful application of the results, thereof; and - The most effective utilization of the scientific and engineering resources of the United States, with close cooperation among all interested agencies of the United States in order to avoid unnecessary duplication of effort, facilities, and equipment. In 2012, a ninth objective was added: "The preservation of the United States preeminent position in aeronautics and space through research and technology development related to associated manufacturing processes."
fmap 10y ago
The most alarming thing is that they are explicitly cutting anything to do with climate change (there's a more comprehensive overview here: https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/politics/trump-presidential-budget-2018-proposal/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/politics/trump-presi...). That's also a large part of what the NASA budget cut is aimed at...
- knz 10y ago
  It's also incredibly shortsighted. The military and insurance industry are both well aware of the implications of unmitigated climate change. Likewise with the public health implications from increased pollution. These are tangible impacts that will cost us more than the "savings" proposed in this budget. It's like skipping oil changes on a car to save money.... NPR is also reporting that the Army Corp of Engineers has a proposed -16% cut (http://www.npr.org/2017/03/16/520305293/trump-to-unveil-hard-power-budget-that-boosts-military-spending http://www.npr.org/2017/03/16/520305293/trump-to-unveil-hard...). Are they not responsible for mitigating the natural hazards that are expected to increase due to climate change?
  - finid 10y ago
    Just remember that whatever "savings" from these cuts are designed to fund the $54 billion gift to the military. So there's really is no savings.
- finid 10y ago
  I don't see what's alarming there. The guy is staying true to what he believes, or does not believe. And he was explicit about it. If you recall, he said something along the lines of climate change being a Chinese fairy tale.
  - SamPhillips 10y ago
    It was alarming before when he said it, and then alarming then he followed up and did it, for exactly the same reasons. The scientific community is clear & unambiguous: this is a huge problem now with civilization-level consequences, and the political answer is "this is all a fairy tale, let's not look into it any more". Alarming is 100% correct. It should alarm everyone.
saltenhav 10y ago
"Also on the chopping block: the entire NASA Education office, which ... provides internships and scholarships for young scientists" I was an intern last year working on one of the listed missions (now slated to be cut), and was planning on returning again this summer. I knew this was coming from Trump, but not this quickly or this hard. It's difficult to describe in concrete terms how I feel - I don't mean to be a sad sack; it's just a surreal situation. This means that many months of my work on my first real job were all for naught. Do you ever get personally attached to your work? I felt like my effort there was making an impact; it wasn't a boring sort-a-filing-cabinet internship. And it just disappeared for good, since I don't think there will be funding for a reboot later. I feel listless, which is also helped by the fact that it doesn't sound like I have a career in the near-term. Kinda pulled out from under me. And I only just found out about this from this news article; at least the concrete specifics. Is anyone still taking applications for an undergrad intern, with intern-level experience in aerospace controls engineering (rising senior CS major)? I don't want to limit myself to that specifically either; anything with a decent cross-section of either math, software, or robotics is my jam. Sorry to put this out here like this, but I'm wary that I'm running out of time to find something since aerospace intern hiring seems to conclude all the way back in early Fall.
- mordant 10y ago
  > It's difficult to describe in concrete terms how I feel I can tell you how I feel. I feel great that I'm not being forced to subsidize your career with my tax dollars.
  - piva00 10y ago
    Can't really tell if the italics are sarcasm or not.

76 points by jskinger 10y ago

tbomb 10y ago

On the bright side, that's much less of a budget cut than what I was expecting!

finid 10y ago
So how deep of a cut were you expecting?

DoodleBuggy 10y ago

Who needs science and education?

simonh 10y ago
Not hotel and casino operators, apparently.
- SketchySeaBeast 10y ago
  I guess the theory is you can't be too poor to gamble?

ocschwar 10y ago

One of those gadgets is designed to measure refraction and radiance from greenhouse gasses. I.e. to confirm or correct the only assumptions in climate modeling that are even remotely controversial. Gee, I wonder why they want to cancel it.

hackuser 10y ago

The Dept of Education budget also is proposed to be cut significantly, including deep cuts in financial aid to college students. NIH research also is proposed to suffer large cuts. And while I'm at it, the National Endowment for the Arts and National Endowment for the Humanities are proposed to be eliminated entirely.

Finnucane 10y ago
Yeah, basically, if it doesn't involve killing people or the police state, it's getting a cut. Unfortunately, the language I would use to describe my feelings about this is probably not considered appropriate for HN.
- Arizhel 10y ago
  Yes, but it's also important to realize that this is the will of the American people. They voted for this; they voted for this Administration, and they voted for this Congress.
  - knz 10y ago
    The popular vote would disagree with this sentiment in regards to voting for this administration.... If the will of the people was a consideration then we would see a more balanced proposal without such severe cuts to agencies and programs that Trump associates with "liberals". Abolishing the NEA or destroying the ability of the EPA to regulate pollution is pure political ideology. Reducing the ability of our government to study climate change isn't based upon scientific fact - it's done because it doesn't fit within the worldview of our current administration.
    - Arizhel 10y ago
      The popular vote wasn't that far away; it never is, or else the election would have gone the other way. The Electoral College gives extra weight to votes in smaller states, but only so much. That's why I pointed out that the people voted for this Congress, not just this Administration. They voted GOP not only for the House, but for the Senate too, so you can't even make any claims about "gerrymandering". They even voted GOP for governorships and local elections. The bottom line: outside of a few particular places (namely California), the people of this country want the GOP and its policies. As for your "balanced proposal" idea, things don't work like that. When one party has total power in both Congress and the White House, they can do pretty much whatever they want. If the people had wanted more balance, they would have voted for a more balanced Congress. They didn't. They overwhelmingly filled the seats with GOP candidates.

ntaylor 10y ago

It's worth noting that the actual impact to NASA's budget is relatively small. Down to 19.1bn from 19.3bn.

donpdonp 10y ago
Yes, -1% for NASA in the proposal. The EPA is what gets hit hard - listed as -31%. Also worth noting: "Discretionary spending limits, addressed by this proposal, are set by congressional budget resolutions. Congress typically makes changes to the president’s proposal — last year, lawmakers disregarded Obama’s budget altogether. " https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/politics/trump-presidential-budget-2018-proposal/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/politics/trump-presi...

heifetz 10y ago

Since Bannon is preparing for a nuclear winter, anything other than defense and military spending is non-essential.

Mythanar 10y ago

I am professionally involved in space tech. Have to say, I like Trump's administration stance on NASA (quote): "We see NASA in an exploration role, in deep space research," Bob Walker, a senior Trump adviser, told the Guardian newspaper. "Earth-centric science is better placed at other agencies where it is their prime mission." ...much more then I liked the previous administrator (Charles Bolden) mission: "When I became the NASA administrator, (President Obama) charged me with three things," Bolden said in the interview which aired last week. "One, he wanted me to help re-inspire children to want to get into science and math; he wanted me to expand our international relationships; and third, and perhaps foremost, he wanted me to find a way to reach out to the Muslim world and engage much more with dominantly Muslim nations to help them feel good about their historic contribution to science, math and engineering." Why were Muslim national relationships a NASA mission? Thought we had State Department for that.

bhhaskin 10y ago
It makes perfect sense to move earth sciences to other agencies. NOAA should be taking point.
- knz 10y ago
  Are NOAA getting that additional responsibility and associated funding? Also, NASA's charter is much more broad than just space exploration. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Aeronautics_and_Space_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Aeronautics_and_Space... "The original 1958 act charged the new Agency with conducting the aeronautical and space activities of the United States "so as to contribute materially to one or more of the following objectives:" - The expansion of human knowledge of phenomena in the atmosphere and space; - The improvement of the usefulness, performance, speed, safety, and efficiency of aeronautical and space vehicles; - The development and operation of vehicles capable of carrying instruments, equipment, supplies and living organisms through space; - The establishment of long-range studies of the potential benefits to be gained from, the opportunities for, and the problems involved in the utilization of aeronautical and space activities for peaceful and scientific purposes. - The preservation of the role of the United States as a leader in aeronautical and space science and technology and in the application thereof to the conduct of peaceful activities within and outside the atmosphere. - The making available to agencies directly concerned with national defenses of discoveries that have military value or significance, and the furnishing by such agencies, to the civilian agency established to direct and control nonmilitary aeronautical and space activities, of information as to discoveries which have value or significance to that agency; - Cooperation by the United States with other nations and groups of nations in work done pursuant to this Act and in the peaceful application of the results, thereof; and - The most effective utilization of the scientific and engineering resources of the United States, with close cooperation among all interested agencies of the United States in order to avoid unnecessary duplication of effort, facilities, and equipment. In 2012, a ninth objective was added: "The preservation of the United States preeminent position in aeronautics and space through research and technology development related to associated manufacturing processes."

fmap 10y ago

The most alarming thing is that they are explicitly cutting anything to do with climate change (there's a more comprehensive overview here: https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/politics/trump-presidential-budget-2018-proposal/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/politics/trump-presi...). That's also a large part of what the NASA budget cut is aimed at...

knz 10y ago
It's also incredibly shortsighted. The military and insurance industry are both well aware of the implications of unmitigated climate change. Likewise with the public health implications from increased pollution. These are tangible impacts that will cost us more than the "savings" proposed in this budget. It's like skipping oil changes on a car to save money.... NPR is also reporting that the Army Corp of Engineers has a proposed -16% cut (http://www.npr.org/2017/03/16/520305293/trump-to-unveil-hard-power-budget-that-boosts-military-spending http://www.npr.org/2017/03/16/520305293/trump-to-unveil-hard...). Are they not responsible for mitigating the natural hazards that are expected to increase due to climate change?
- finid 10y ago
  Just remember that whatever "savings" from these cuts are designed to fund the $54 billion gift to the military. So there's really is no savings.
finid 10y ago
I don't see what's alarming there. The guy is staying true to what he believes, or does not believe. And he was explicit about it. If you recall, he said something along the lines of climate change being a Chinese fairy tale.
- SamPhillips 10y ago
  It was alarming before when he said it, and then alarming then he followed up and did it, for exactly the same reasons. The scientific community is clear & unambiguous: this is a huge problem now with civilization-level consequences, and the political answer is "this is all a fairy tale, let's not look into it any more". Alarming is 100% correct. It should alarm everyone.

saltenhav 10y ago

"Also on the chopping block: the entire NASA Education office, which ... provides internships and scholarships for young scientists" I was an intern last year working on one of the listed missions (now slated to be cut), and was planning on returning again this summer. I knew this was coming from Trump, but not this quickly or this hard. It's difficult to describe in concrete terms how I feel - I don't mean to be a sad sack; it's just a surreal situation. This means that many months of my work on my first real job were all for naught. Do you ever get personally attached to your work? I felt like my effort there was making an impact; it wasn't a boring sort-a-filing-cabinet internship. And it just disappeared for good, since I don't think there will be funding for a reboot later. I feel listless, which is also helped by the fact that it doesn't sound like I have a career in the near-term. Kinda pulled out from under me. And I only just found out about this from this news article; at least the concrete specifics. Is anyone still taking applications for an undergrad intern, with intern-level experience in aerospace controls engineering (rising senior CS major)? I don't want to limit myself to that specifically either; anything with a decent cross-section of either math, software, or robotics is my jam. Sorry to put this out here like this, but I'm wary that I'm running out of time to find something since aerospace intern hiring seems to conclude all the way back in early Fall.

mordant 10y ago
> It's difficult to describe in concrete terms how I feel I can tell you how I feel. I feel great that I'm not being forced to subsidize your career with my tax dollars.
- piva00 10y ago
  Can't really tell if the italics are sarcasm or not.