Congress Cuts NASA's Budget On Apollo Anniversary

colonist writes "A House appropriations subcommittee voted to cut NASA's budget request by 7 percent on the 35th anniversary of Neil Armstrong's first steps on the Moon. The panel also cut environment and science programs, but increased funding for veterans' affairs. NASA would get $15.1 billion next year, $229 million below this year and $1.1 billion below the President's request. Most of the cuts are on new initiatives. The subcommittee is the first step of a long budget process and major changes to the bill are expected."

Comments

Hmmmm.

[SatanicPuppy]

Didn't bush make some big statement about a manned mission to Mars?

I guess when it didn't successfully divert attention from the war casulaties, he tossed that idea.

Re:Hmmmm.

[mtrupe]

nevermind the fact that this was an act of Congress and not Bush... You knee jerk liberals just have to be angry at Bush for everything, don't you?

Its been abundantly clear that Bush wants to fund the space program and go to Mars, but you're still pissed off at hime. Will you be pissed off at John Kerry when he actually does cut NASA funding (drastically) so that more can be given to inner city bums?

Wait a tic, policy reversal?

[TiggertheMad]

Didn't George Jr. announce that we were going to start getting back into the space race bisnuess again awhile back? I believe that it was a reactionary announcement made after the Chinese announced that they would take the socialist workers struggle to the moon within ten years.

While I don't really think that we need to try to compete with the Chinese in space, it seemed like a decent idea to get back to a real space exploration program again.

Someone ought to point out to JR. that space exploration isn't helped by cutting budgets. Ecenomic realitys are importan considerations, but wouldn't the administration have know that the money probably wouldn't be there?

Re:Sad to say, but I actually agree with Congress

[dvk]

> With Bush's multiple rounds of slashing taxes, that means we have LESS to spend

Eh? Well, if by "we" you mean "the lazy bums who leech off government handouts", then yes, I suppose you're right.
As for me, and most other people who work for a living and thus earn taxable income, ***we*** have MORE to spend.

Thanks for playing, and move to xCommunist Republic of California. Do not pass Go, do not steal my hard-earned dollars in disguise of "taxation".