House Appropriators Consider NASA FY 1997 Budget
At an April 25 hearing of the House VA/HUD Appropriations Subcommittee, NASA Administrator Daniel Goldin made the surprising request that Congress not provide additional funding for one of the programs under his jurisdiction.
The previous day, the House Science Committee passed authorizing legislation that would cut $373.7 million from Mission to Planet Earth in FY 1997, but would provide an additional $310.0 million to NASA’s space science programs (see FYI #68.) (The authorizing legislation is intended to provide guidance to the appropriators, who actually control the money.) This action was foreshadowed at an April 17 hearing of the Science Committee’s Space Subcommittee, where Subcommittee Chairman James Sensenbrenner (R-WI) warned that the spending cuts projected for NASA through the end of the century could “fall disproportionately on space science.” At that hearing, Sensenbrenner told members of the space science community, “When we rework the President’s budget, you’re going to get a far better shake than you’ve gotten from OMB [the Office of Management and Budget.]”
At yesterday’s appropriations hearing, Ranking Minority Member Louis Stokes (D-OH) asked what Goldin thought of the authorizers’ actions. Goldin argued forcefully for full funding for Mission to Planet Earth, but added that - independent of that consideration - he did not think space science should receive additional funding when NASA was still in the process of determining where that enterprise could be cut and efficiencies made to save money. “I’m not yet satisfied they’re where they should be,” he said. Goldin’s written testimony states that although the space science budget declines, the level of activity does not; the decline is due to the winding down of several programs, including AXAF and Cassini.
Goldin addressed the subcommittee with a plea he has made several times recently. “If I could ask one single request,” he said, it would be for stability. He said the space agency has “gone through cut after cut, change after change,” and needs a pause to consolidate the changes. Goldin supported the Administration’s FY 1997 request of $13.8 billion, but he was asked repeatedly about the outyear projections, which show NASA’s budget dropping to $11.6 billion by FY 2000. Goldin replied that he did not know how to meet that target and still produce useful results, but was “cautiously optimistic” that he would not have to. He said the projections included a number of uncertainties, and he was working with OMB on revising them.
Regardless of future budgets, Goldin stated, “we’re going to build the space station no matter what;" NASA would need to put more money into the shuttle; and he intended to ensure strong space and Earth sciences programs. He argued vehemently against a $373.7 million cut to Mission to Planet Earth. A one-time cut of that amount, he said, would mean delaying a number of needed measurements and result in higher future costs, while a cut of that amount each year would require fundamental changes in policy. Earth science for sustainable development “is not a frivolous economic policy,” Goldin declared; “the environmental debate in this nation is at a shameful level,” and Mission to Planet Earth would provide the needed facts. When questioned about excess Mission to Planet Earth funds carried over from last year, Goldin and NASA officials explained that they had not yet been spent due to permit schedule delays, government furloughs and a series of continuing resolutions.
Rep. Joe Knollenberg (R-MI) asked whether NASA should be planning SIRTF [Space Infrared Telescope Facility] as a new start for the future, given the current budget climate. Goldin replied that SIRTF was NASA’s number-one priority in space science. He pointed out that a redesign had reduced its lifecycle costs from $2 billion to $600 million, and hoped he could recommend a “hard start” to Congress in FY 1998.
Subcommittee Chairman Jerry Lewis (R-CA) questioned why NASA had singled out the TDRSS [Tracking and Data Relay Satellite System] replacement and New Millennium programs to receive, in FY 1997, full funding through completion. Goldin responded that it would send a signal to industry and contractors that funding would be stable, but there would be no additional funds available for cost overruns.
Goldin countered concerns abut cost overruns and Russian participation on the space station by saying that the program had sufficient reserves, and the Russian government had recently reaffirmed its commitment to the project. Asked about criticism of the station by some in the science community, he pointed out that most of the station’s research would be in life and microgravity sciences. In addition, it might also be used to calibrate a number of Mission to Planet Earth sensors, and has potential for research into dark matter and antimatter.
Praising NASA for its efforts at downsizing, Chairman Lewis regretted that the agency had to compete for funds with housing, veterans’ and EPA programs. The subcommittee gave no indication of how closely they would follow the authorizing legislation when they draft their FY 1997 funding bill.
