Author Topic: Bill aims to realign Executive influence over NASA  (Read 65019 times)

Offline spectre9

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2403
  • Australia
  • Liked: 42
  • Likes Given: 68
Re: Bill aims to realign Executive influence over NASA
« Reply #20 on: 08/17/2012 03:42 am »
10 years?

Where have I heard that before?

What must be done in 10 years?

 :D

Offline yg1968

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17267
  • Liked: 7123
  • Likes Given: 3065
Re: Bill aims to realign Executive influence over NASA
« Reply #21 on: 08/17/2012 02:35 pm »
I can't say that I like the idea. imagine having Griffin for 10 years. Plus, I am not sure that the OMB's influence is as bad as Griffin made it out to be during his years as Administrator. NASA does need some kind of oversight from the President and OMB. I don't know if the OMB is behind the NASA FY2011 budget but if it is a lot of these ideas made a lot of sense.
« Last Edit: 08/17/2012 02:38 pm by yg1968 »

Offline John Duncan

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 453
  • Odenville, Al
  • Liked: 12
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: Bill aims to realign Executive influence over NASA
« Reply #22 on: 08/17/2012 05:32 pm »
Actually, now that I think about it, getting rid of OMB's authority over NASA's budget would probably be the best option.  They have been strangling NASA for decades....and are neither bipartisan nor non partisan.

Offline ChileVerde

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1176
  • La frontera
  • Liked: 4
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Bill aims to realign Executive influence over NASA
« Reply #23 on: 08/17/2012 06:27 pm »
I think some are missing the point.  This bill does not divorce NASA from the government, the executive or legislative branch.  It would still very much be subject to oversight.

And NASA would still be subject to Congress telling NASA what to do if Congress chose to legislate, for its own reasons, its own preferences. I refrain from pointing out a current example.
"I can’t tell you which asteroid, but there will be one in 2025," Bolden asserted.

Offline vulture4

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1099
  • Liked: 431
  • Likes Given: 92
Re: Bill aims to realign Executive influence over NASA
« Reply #24 on: 08/17/2012 07:02 pm »
I think some are missing the point.  This bill does not divorce NASA from the government, the executive or legislative branch.  It would still very much be subject to oversight.

And NASA would still be subject to Congress telling NASA what to do if Congress chose to legislate, for its own reasons, its own preferences. I refrain from pointing out a current example.

I agree. We haven't even seen the bill. This may just be about Congress taking power from the Administration.

There are a lot of things that would make the agency more efficient. What about allowing "end-of-year" money to be carried over without adversely affecting subsequent budgets? So we wouldn't have "Spend $1M by COB today!" panics. That alone would help. Are you listening, Congress?

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37441
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21451
  • Likes Given: 428
Re: Bill aims to realign Executive influence over NASA
« Reply #25 on: 08/17/2012 07:11 pm »
Actually, now that I think about it, getting rid of OMB's authority over NASA's budget would probably be the best option.  They have been strangling NASA for decades....and are neither bipartisan nor non partisan.

That makes no sense. OMB works for the president and they are following his policy.  OMB manages the whole budget for executive branch which NASA is part of.  There is no way around excluding nasa

Offline JohnFornaro

  • Not an expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10974
  • Delta-t is an important metric.
  • Planet Eaarth
    • Design / Program Associates
  • Liked: 1257
  • Likes Given: 724
Re: Bill aims to realign Executive influence over NASA
« Reply #26 on: 08/17/2012 07:54 pm »
What about allowing "end-of-year" money to be carried over without adversely affecting subsequent budgets?

If, for valid reasons, the budget is not used up entirely, save it.  This is the key reform which could streamline our government.  The bureaucrats will object that if they should save money in a given fiscal year, that Congress will give them less money the next fiscal year.  That's fine.  The bureacrats are actually making a concerted effort to expand government without reason, and it should stop.

There are readily legislated limits to how much can be saved and how that financial process transpires.  The state of Virginia, for example, has a rainy day fund which is filled when income outpaces expense, and used when expense outpaces income.
Sometimes I just flat out don't get it.

Offline Prober

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10348
  • Save the spin....I'm keeping you honest!
  • Nevada
  • Liked: 721
  • Likes Given: 729
Re: Bill aims to realign Executive influence over NASA
« Reply #27 on: 08/17/2012 08:30 pm »
Actually, now that I think about it, getting rid of OMB's authority over NASA's budget would probably be the best option.  They have been strangling NASA for decades....and are neither bipartisan nor non partisan.

That makes no sense. OMB works for the president and they are following his policy.  OMB manages the whole budget for executive branch which NASA is part of.  There is no way around excluding nasa

What about putting NASA back under the AF wing or Military in general?
2017 - Everything Old is New Again.
"I fear all we have done is to awaken a sleeping giant..." --Isoroku Yamamoto

Offline vulture4

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1099
  • Liked: 431
  • Likes Given: 92
Re: Bill aims to realign Executive influence over NASA
« Reply #28 on: 08/18/2012 12:43 am »
What about allowing "end-of-year" money to be carried over without adversely affecting subsequent budgets?

If, for valid reasons, the budget is not used up entirely, save it.  This is the key reform which could streamline our government.  The bureaucrats will object that if they should save money in a given fiscal year, that Congress will give them less money the next fiscal year.  That's fine.  The bureacrats are actually making a concerted effort to expand government without reason, and it should stop.

There are readily legislated limits to how much can be saved and how that financial process transpires.  The state of Virginia, for example, has a rainy day fund which is filled when income outpaces expense, and used when expense outpaces income.


I can't conceive of a task performed by government that is so simplistic that one can consistently predict exactly how much it will cost to do the best possible job a year and a half ahead of time. One has to leave contingency funds of the whole program may run out of money and crash. But if a manager does his level best and is lucky, and there is money left over, instead of being able to use the resources that have been saved to plan a better job next year he or she is expected to to the same job next year with less.

Offline spectre9

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2403
  • Australia
  • Liked: 42
  • Likes Given: 68
Re: Bill aims to realign Executive influence over NASA
« Reply #29 on: 08/18/2012 03:32 am »
With 10 year terms NASA administrators would be able to see their pet projects come to fruition rather than begging to get funding for things that might get the axe.

Did Griffin really fail?

He had to balance shuttle, ISS & exploration all at once. It was a house of cards and it was always likely to fall down without him.

I'd say he suffered because the report advising him was horrible.

Now Bolden has a new report to advise him and he is doing a good job of sticking to it. The first report said NASA needs heavy lift so there was a secondary report to find out which heavy lifter they should build. If NASA falls down at any point it's because there are flaws in the results of these reports.

Offline QuantumG

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9238
  • Australia
  • Liked: 4477
  • Likes Given: 1108
Re: Bill aims to realign Executive influence over NASA
« Reply #30 on: 08/18/2012 03:34 am »
I'm not sure exactly what you're trying to say.. Griffin was given free reign by the administration. He got every dollar from Congress he ever asked for (his words), but by the time he left office every objective assessment was that he had produced almost nothing of value. His programs were chopped and changed every six to twelve months because of technical bungles, not politics.
« Last Edit: 08/18/2012 03:35 am by QuantumG »
Human spaceflight is basically just LARPing now.

Offline spectre9

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2403
  • Australia
  • Liked: 42
  • Likes Given: 68
Re: Bill aims to realign Executive influence over NASA
« Reply #31 on: 08/18/2012 04:23 am »
I'm saying that the wonderful reports about what multi-billion dollar exploration system developments should be undertaken are full of errors and bias because politics gets in the way.

Even something like "NASA must use shuttle hardware" is too much control and will end up costing them more money in the long run.

The concerns for jobs in certain areas should not be an engineering concern for exploration hardware.

Offline QuantumG

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9238
  • Australia
  • Liked: 4477
  • Likes Given: 1108
Re: Bill aims to realign Executive influence over NASA
« Reply #32 on: 08/18/2012 04:51 am »
I'm saying that the wonderful reports about what multi-billion dollar exploration system developments should be undertaken are full of errors and bias because politics gets in the way.

Or, as in the case of Griffin, just hubris.

Quote
Even something like "NASA must use shuttle hardware" is too much control and will end up costing them more money in the long run.

The concerns for jobs in certain areas should not be an engineering concern for exploration hardware.

Can't say I disagree with that, but it doesn't explain your comments on Griffin's tenure.
Human spaceflight is basically just LARPing now.

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37441
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21451
  • Likes Given: 428
Re: Bill aims to realign Executive influence over NASA
« Reply #33 on: 08/18/2012 12:55 pm »

What about putting NASA back under the AF wing or Military in general?

It was never under to go back to.  It would get less money then and anyways defeats the purposes of NASA existing in the first place.

Offline Prober

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10348
  • Save the spin....I'm keeping you honest!
  • Nevada
  • Liked: 721
  • Likes Given: 729
Re: Bill aims to realign Executive influence over NASA
« Reply #34 on: 08/18/2012 02:13 pm »

What about putting NASA back under the AF wing or Military in general?

It was never under to go back to.  It would get less money then and anyways defeats the purposes of NASA existing in the first place.

was trying to think of a way to "shield" NASA from all funding and mission interference(s).   Thinking now, the Military has enough issues to deal with.
2017 - Everything Old is New Again.
"I fear all we have done is to awaken a sleeping giant..." --Isoroku Yamamoto

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37441
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21451
  • Likes Given: 428
Re: Bill aims to realign Executive influence over NASA
« Reply #35 on: 08/18/2012 03:20 pm »

What about putting NASA back under the AF wing or Military in general?

It was never under to go back to.  It would get less money then and anyways defeats the purposes of NASA existing in the first place.

was trying to think of a way to "shield" NASA from all funding and mission interference(s).   Thinking now, the Military has enough issues to deal with.


Military couldn't shield it.  Military programs get the same funding and mission interference.

Offline wolfpack

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 743
  • Wake Forest, NC
  • Liked: 159
  • Likes Given: 4
Re: Bill aims to realign Executive influence over NASA
« Reply #36 on: 08/18/2012 03:34 pm »
What about putting NASA back under the AF wing or Military in general?

Bad idea. Combining space programs and the military creates fear in the international community that your space program is really a weapons system. It's the reason NASA was never organized within the DoD in the first place. The Space Act of 1958 created NASA and directed them to seek involvement from the international community for space exploration. Didn't happen until Shuttle, really, because Mercury and Gemini used USAF boosters and Apollo was too expensive for anyone to participate.

Offline yg1968

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17267
  • Liked: 7123
  • Likes Given: 3065
Re: Bill aims to realign Executive influence over NASA
« Reply #37 on: 09/19/2012 02:02 pm »
The bill is being introduced on Thursday:
http://wolf.house.gov/press-releases/advisory-culberson-wolf-posey-olson-and-smith-introduce-space-leadership-act/

I seriously doubt that any President would ever agree to sign such a bill. I also hope that the rest of the House will not agree to pass this bill. Interesting to see that Ralph Hall isn't a co-sponsor of the bill.
« Last Edit: 09/19/2012 02:26 pm by yg1968 »

Offline aquanaut99

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1049
  • Liked: 33
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Bill aims to realign Executive influence over NASA
« Reply #38 on: 09/19/2012 02:34 pm »
The bill is being introduced on Thursday:
http://wolf.house.gov/press-releases/advisory-culberson-wolf-posey-olson-and-smith-introduce-space-leadership-act/

I seriously doubt that any President would ever agree to sign such a bill. I also hope that the rest of the House will not agree to pass this bill. Interesting to see that Ralph Hall isn't a co-sponsor of the bill.

I may be blind, or stupid, but... what exactly does this bill propose (other than "ensuring America's preeminence in space leadership")?

At least it sounds as if you think it's a bad idea. Which, considering the source, is probably the case.

Offline spectre9

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2403
  • Australia
  • Liked: 42
  • Likes Given: 68
Re: Bill aims to realign Executive influence over NASA
« Reply #39 on: 09/20/2012 01:47 am »
Can't say I disagree with that, but it doesn't explain your comments on Griffin's tenure.

Griffin is now marred by the stupid things he said to defend the CxP hardware.

I don't think he was that bad, NASA is now looking to conduct BEO exploration with expendable rockets. Something they haven't considered since Apollo.

Working through the initial politics of exploration system development led to agency wide change.

He did his best to defend the agency in difficult political times. To me he was only doing his job which was to cover up mess and tell everybody it was fine.

The people that made that mess deserve some of the blame too.

Have the SLS studies been any more honest than ESAS?

I certainly hope so.

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
0