Congressional and Administration Officials Provide Science Funding

Three speakers at a special session at yesterday’s 183rd meeting of the American Astronomical Society addressed the topic, “The Changing Climate for Federal Funding.” Jack Fellows, Chief, Space Science and Programs Branch, OMB; Bill Smith, Staff Director of the House Subcommittee on Space; and Dick Malow, Staff Assistant, House VA, HUD, and Independent Agencies Appropriations Subcommittee, offered the following comments:

FELLOWS:

“In [FY 19] 95, even within OMB, we are basically looking at a freeze [for NASA]...probably at the best.”

”...it probably remains that the people that can embrace this...smaller, cheaper, faster philosophy are the ones that are probably going to do better than others over the next...decade or so.”

“It really does not matter how much the administration proposes for NASA...it is the allocation process of Congress that really rules the level of funding.”

SMITH:

”...the rather bleak outlook that we are beginning to see for NASA, and that declining trend...[for future NASA budgets] is real. The NASA budget isn’t going to be growing; it may not even be frozen. It will probably be declining.”

“No one really talks about science being NASA’s number one priority much any more. A couple of years ago that was on everybody’s lips. It’s really hard to find people who have taken that to heart, and believe that today. NASA’s science program has been displaced by a lot of other priorities: technology development, foreign policy with respect to the space station, a lot of other things.”

“Their [House science committee] support for space station is up in the air. It’s not a given. We will look very carefully at the space station question. There are really two things that concern us about the space station: One, the manner in which we have structured our cooperation with the Russians. There are many of our members who feel that we have become excessively dependent upon the Russians to deliver politically, financially, and technically.... The second issue is whether, in the aggregate, science has suffered from having too many things in the NASA budget. And if the NASA budget fails those tests, I think you will see real change, shift, in the kinds of priorities my committee has had.”

“I don’t think there is any program that is protected. There is no program that is beyond reach. And it doesn’t even matter what the committees of jurisdiction think about them. It’s what happens on the [House] floor.”

“I am really hopeful that the success that the [refitted] Hubble has had...will go a long ways towards reversing that [negative NASA image.] Because frankly, we need a better image for the space program in Congress if we are to get by in the next several years.”

MALOW:

“Unfortunately...the numbers, I am afraid, are just not there.”

“We all want to see new projects.... But with these numbers, we do not want to forget the fact that we have to operate these programs. And the operating costs of some of these programs can be very large.... every time you think about a new project, and you think it is a wonderful project, you may in the end have to do more thinking about where is the money going to come from to operate that.”