Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Obama's 2016 NASA Budget Status Quo, Funds Europa Mission

Posted by samzenpus on from the paying-bills dept.

MarkWhittington writes The Washington Post reported that the NASA portion of the president's 2016 budget proposal is basically status quo though it does provide further funding for a mission to Europa. A Europa probe is near and dear to the new chairman of the House Appropriations Subcommittee that funds NASA, Rep. John Culberson. However, the $18.5 billion budget proposal also funds the asteroid redirect mission, which has come under increasing fire from both Congress and the scientific community. The Houston Chronicle suggested that the final spending bill will be considerably different once congressional Republicans get through with it.

21 of 92 comments (clear)

  1. Europa by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    But I was told not to attempt any landings there

    1. Re:Europa by Darinbob · · Score: 3, Funny

      But then they'll try to fund a pipeline from Europa to American refineries so that they can sell the gasoline to China.

    2. Re:Europa by TWX · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Probably because there are people that are into things that you're not into?

      Life would be incredibly dull if we were all into only the same things.

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    3. Re:Europa by Grishnakh · · Score: 4, Funny

      Hello from 2015!!! I see you are a time-traveler from the year 2034 (since the movie "2010" starring Roy Scheider came out in 1984), or have somehow discovered a rift in the space-time continuum by which you can communicate with the past. Can you please tell us about life in 2034 and what mistakes we can avoid?

  2. Attempt no landings there by NotDrWho · · Score: 2

    Unless the lander is being built in your Congressional district.

    --
    SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
  3. Europa by Zalbik · · Score: 4, Funny

    Europa?!?!

    Well that's it, we're doomed.

    Thanks Obama

  4. Too early to be discussing the contents by jandrese · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The budget that Obama submitted is basically a fantasy novel with lots of boring numbers in it. The House and Senate are going to shitcan it the instant it lands in their hands so they can pass their own budget instead. It's not even worth talking about the budget because it has absolutely nothing to do with whatever finally makes it through Congress.

    --

    I read the internet for the articles.
    1. Re:Too early to be discussing the contents by MerlynEmrys67 · · Score: 2

      I would be happy if the Senate shitcans it and actually votes on something else. Would be better than what H.R. has done for the past 6 years which isn't to even to bother voting on a budget, much less one that could actually pass. Lets hope the Republicans can do a little better and actually vote on a budget, even better if they can get 6-10 Democrats to vote yes (and even better if 3-4 Republicans vote against it)

      --
      I have mod points and I am not afraid to use them
    2. Re:Too early to be discussing the contents by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Obama has, in Hollywood jargon, "jumped the shark".

      As he provocatively noted in the State of the Union Address . . . he does not have to face any re-election. He has found legal loopholes, which allow him to do whatever he wants, and totally ignore Congress or the Supreme Court. He can open the borders to the US to floods of illegal immigrants, change foreign policy against nations that have threatened the US with nuclear missiles and call for violence against domestic police forces.

      And now he will be implementing a tax plan to "help the middle class" . . . by taxing the middle class more. Rich folks don't pay any taxes. They can afford expensive tax lawyers. A lot of families with two working parents will be surprised to learn that they are "wealthy" under Obama's new rules.

      I recently watched documentary in German television about infamous dictators Josef Stalin, Muammar Gaddafi and Idi Amin.

      It was quite frightening that I thought that Obama would fit in quite well with this crew . . .

      --
      Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    3. Re:Too early to be discussing the contents by dywolf · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Your idiocy is showing.

      1- They aren't legal loopholes. A law previously passed by Congress that gives the POTUS authority to act is NOT a legal loophole. It is simply the exercise of powers already granted.

      2- He isn't flooding the country with illegal immigrants. No POTUS in history has cracked down as hard on immigration as he has. In his first term alone he deported more people the in the previous 12 years. Furthermore, net immigration across the Mexican border has actually been negative for the past two years.

      3- He is the POTUS. He IS the head diplomat of the country. HE SETS FOREIGN POLICY.

      4- What you said about taxes is a blatant lie. The taxes proposed are wholly on the upper classes and business.

      What's truly frightening isn't how uninformed and detached from reality you are,
      nor even that you still vote despite that ignorance,
      but that people modded you insightful, which means you aren't the dumbest one here.

      --
      The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
    4. Re:Too early to be discussing the contents by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 2

      Your idiocy is showing.

      No . . . yours is hanging out . . . wildly. Call me up when you go to High School and get accepted at MIT and Princeton. Insider tip: They look at the "character" of the applicant.

      1- They aren't legal loopholes. A law previously passed by Congress that gives the POTUS authority to act is NOT a legal loophole.

      The law says that people who are in the US illegally . . . are well, illegal. Obama is refusing to enforce the laws of the country. He could tell the FBI not to prosecute car jacking or rape, as well.

      2- He isn't flooding the country with illegal immigrants.

      Then why are shelters for illegal immigrants bursting to the rafters? Obama is pandering to Hispanic/Latino voters. There was a nice article about this in The Economist, but that is above your reading level.

      3- He is the POTUS. He IS the head diplomat of the country. HE SETS FOREIGN POLICY.

      When the US was formed, one thing that the founding fathers explicitly wanted to avoid, was creating a "kingdom" . . . a dictatorship. That is why the US government is divided into three branches, with a system of "checks and balances," to avoid a tyrant like King George III of England.

      Yes, the POTUS is the boss . . . but he is expected to respect the other branches of government.

      Obama is starting to look like Idi Amin.

      Mr. Obama, please get your lips away from the crack pipe!"

      4- What you said about taxes is a blatant lie. The taxes proposed are wholly on the upper classes and business.

      Obama's upper classes and business are people who make more than $250,000 a year. For a pair of IT people working in California, that's about what they need, to afford the house and the kids. That's middle class.

      Rich folks don't pay any taxes. They can afford expensive tax lawyers who can prove that they earn nothing.

      you aren't the dumbest one here.

      No, you are . . . number 6 :-)

      --
      Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    5. Re:Too early to be discussing the contents by MooseMiester · · Score: 2
      http://www.nationalreview.com/...

      No POTUS in history has cracked down as hard on immigration as he has

      Sir, with all due respect, you're not being terribly honest. It's also widely reported (Outside of liberals blogs like thinkprogress.org, dailykos, etc.) that almost ALL the new jobs created since Obama took office have gone to immigrants.

      --
      Murphy was an optimist
  5. Re:More tax dollars up in smoke. by MightyMartian · · Score: 3, Informative

    Private industry can barely get into orbit.

    --
    The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
  6. Creating a budget isn't the POTUS' job by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    That function is assigned to Congress.

    So why should I care what a lame duck president who lost control of both houses of Congress has to say on the matter? The only influence he could have right now it propose every idea the republicans want to push through and watch them try to figure out how to not support him. Everything he's for they are automatically opposed to so they'd be stuck. It might be entertaining to see a congress person repeating "does not compute" endlessly until their head explodes. Kind of a cross between Mudd from "Star Trek" and "Scanners".

    1. Re:Creating a budget isn't the POTUS' job by sumdumass · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Actually, they passed a law a while back requiring the administration to present a budget to congress so they wouls stop crying about not funding what the administrations wanted. Its just a whishlist more or less and often quite a bit maked it through to the final budget.

      But yes, you are correct, constitutionally it is congress' job. But i think this is more political theator to set up issues for 2016. They cannot really poke a candidate running for more of the same so they have to find a wedge of some sorts to say elect another democrat and this time it will be different without running against the sitting administration.

      Expect a lot more of this in the future.

    2. Re:Creating a budget isn't the POTUS' job by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      That function is assigned to Congress.

      No, that's approving the budget.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_budget_process

      The Budget itself, is requested by the President (who has the authority to submit needful legislation to Congress), under the Budget and Accounting Act of 1921.

      So why should I care what a lame duck president who lost control of both houses of Congress has to say on the matter? The only influence he could have right now it propose every idea the republicans want to push through and watch them try to figure out how to not support him. Everything he's for they are automatically opposed to so they'd be stuck. It might be entertaining to see a congress person repeating "does not compute" endlessly until their head explodes. Kind of a cross between Mudd from "Star Trek" and "Scanners".

      How did you figure out the President's SECRET PLAN? Damn you!

  7. Re:The news is Obama submitted a budget by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    And it you think I'm shitting you, please cite the last Democrat-submitted budget.

    You mean like last year?

    You can even read the budget and scroll and see the numbers and changes on that page. I'm pretty sure he did so for years prior to 2014 as well.

    Obama has had budgets; the Republicans (and truthfully congress as a whole) have argued that budget, fillibustered it, not allowed it to pass, and have been surviving on continuing resolutions for years. But that isn't Obama's fault that our congressmen can't behave like adults and compromise.

  8. Re:More tax dollars up in smoke. by TWX · · Score: 2

    And that same private industry leader is pushing electric cars and home-use solar panels. Sounds like quite the Republican...

    --
    Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
  9. it'll get slashed in half as usual by ihtoit · · Score: 4, Interesting

    while the military spend of the US clears $800Bn - making it yet again the single largest military spender in history, outspending every other nation combined.

    BTW when an increase doesn't keep pace with inflation + the CPI over the same period (which 5% doesn't, and providing that 5% counts annually it's short by about 0.2 for 2013/12-2014/12), then it's a cut.

    --
    Political debates have me rolling my eyes so much I think I got optical whiplash. I should sue. - Foamy The Squirrel
  10. Re:Standard government doublespeak by Fire_Wraith · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It's called inflation. It's why if my pay remains constant, year after year, I'm making less money, because that money won't buy as many things. If it cost $1 million to buy a drone last year, and the government spent $100 million on drones, they bought 100 drones last year. If they spend the same amount next year, when the price of drones goes up to 1.1 million each, they're only buying 90 drones. Now, maybe you think that we shouldn't buy that many drones, or any drones at all, but that's another argument.

  11. Re:More tax dollars up in smoke. by Grishnakh · · Score: 5, Informative

    You're an idiot. Who do you think built the rockets that got men to the Moon? Hint: it wasn't NASA or the government, it was a company called Rocketdyne.

    Today's private spaceflight companies like Orbital Sciences and SpaceX are mostly doing the same thing: they're vying for government contracts for things like ISS resupply missions (in addition to commercial contracts for satellite launches; they didn't have commercial communications or other satellites back in the 60s).