NASA FY 2011 Appropriations - preview

[Halidon]

Ewww. Not big on politics, but a government shutdown isn't likely......is it? I mean, the US will have a lot more to worry about than STS-135 if that happens!

It is and it isn't. Neither major party wants a shutdown, but neither wants to give up more than the other in compromise. The Tea Party wing of the Right seems to want a government shutdown, which is just making things worse.

[Downix]

Ewww. Not big on politics, but a government shutdown isn't likely......is it? I mean, the US will have a lot more to worry about than STS-135 if that happens!

It is and it isn't. Neither major party wants a shutdown, but neither wants to give up more than the other in compromise. The Tea Party wing of the Right seems to want a government shutdown, which is just making things worse.

I honestly don't understand how people can want to shut down their roads, airports, the post office, all stock trading, the courthouses, no police, firefighters, etc.

[robertross]

Obviously just guessing, but how long do people here figure this 'could' last?

I say this because I think back to Bill Gerstenmaier's comment (a while back) to fly STS-135 as late as possible, something like August. Now of course this has been moved up, but perhaps it could slip back to an August timeframe with 'hopefully' enough time to make up for the lost time during a shutdown to get back up to speed on crew training & ops.

Gerst did/does want to go later and so does Suff but it was moved forward because of budget. I talked with crew over the weekend; they've been told it's not gonna slip into August, period.  Not enough money left to fly in August. 

If shutdown occurs and goes longer than a couple of weeks, there won't be enough time in the "budget envelope" or money at the end of that to pay for STS135.  That's what we're hearing. 

Thanks.

I don't suppose there would be a case for NASA to go before congress after the fact with 'hat-in-hand' for supplemental funds for the shuttle launch? Or to get an allowance to (heaven help me for saying this) divert funds from SLS (block 0) in 2012 to pay for it? After all, this is what you get when you cancel a program before having a follow-on capability ready.

[northanger]

If this wasn't noted yet, deadline for US govt shutdown is midnight on Friday, April 8, 2011.

[QuantumG]

I honestly don't understand how people can want to shut down their roads, airports, the post office, all stock trading, the courthouses, no police, firefighters, etc.

Because it doesn't happen like that.  (why is someone outside the US explaining how the US government works to a local?  Because the locals are so ignorant?)  Special provisions are passed to fund all of those essential services.  See http://democrats.rules.house.gov/archives/98-844.pdf

The only thing that shuts down is the kind of superfluous spending that the government shouldn't be doing in the first place.  If you're a legitimate supporter of the tea party, or God forbid, you're a dyed in the wool libertarian, you should be hoping for a government shutdown every year.  Of course, it's impossible to both be one of them and also be a supporter of NASA spending.. so there wouldn't be any of them on this site

[jkumpire]

Ewww. Not big on politics, but a government shutdown isn't likely......is it? I mean, the US will have a lot more to worry about than STS-135 if that happens!

It is and it isn't. Neither major party wants a shutdown, but neither wants to give up more than the other in compromise. The Tea Party wing of the Right seems to want a government shutdown, which is just making things worse.

I don't want to take this off topic, but blaming the Tea Party for any shut down is wrong. They do not want a shutdown either, the other side is trying to pin the blame for a shutdown on them by not having any serious discussions on a CR for the rest of the year.

A shutdown may happen because the people who had power in 2010 refused to do a budget in 2010 because they knew it would hurt them in the election.  Now they refuse to do any serious discussion on a CR because they believe they can blame Republicans when or if a shutdown occurs.

The Tea Party supported the only passed budget proposal for the rest of fiscal 2011. The other side voted it down and has no alternative to it. Blame will be placed on both sides based on what a person's political affiliation is, nothing else. 

[northanger]

If I remember correctly, the sizing of the gonads commences immediately after an orderly government shutdown. (At least in the US!)

But I'm not a political wonk so I'm unclear about procedure.

[OpsAnalyst]

Obviously just guessing, but how long do people here figure this 'could' last?

I say this because I think back to Bill Gerstenmaier's comment (a while back) to fly STS-135 as late as possible, something like August. Now of course this has been moved up, but perhaps it could slip back to an August timeframe with 'hopefully' enough time to make up for the lost time during a shutdown to get back up to speed on crew training & ops.

Gerst did/does want to go later and so does Suff but it was moved forward because of budget. I talked with crew over the weekend; they've been told it's not gonna slip into August, period.  Not enough money left to fly in August. 

If shutdown occurs and goes longer than a couple of weeks, there won't be enough time in the "budget envelope" or money at the end of that to pay for STS135.  That's what we're hearing. 

Thanks.

I don't suppose there would be a case for NASA to go before congress after the fact with 'hat-in-hand' for supplemental funds for the shuttle launch? Or to get an allowance to (heaven help me for saying this) divert funds from SLS (block 0) in 2012 to pay for it? After all, this is what you get when you cancel a program before having a follow-on capability ready.

Last one first, you can't legally appropriate money backwards in time.

First one next, given the mood and complete inability to do their damn jobs in Congress (re: budget accord) the odds of getting supplemental anything for 135 are about nil - tho' that's one woman's opinion.  Would NASA "HEO" / HQ look for the money internally and externally?  Sure.

--- I paused halfway through writing this post to take the pulse of Legislative Affairs folk at NASA HQ, and they're starting to hear that House/Senate aren't more than a few B apart...there is a growing consensus that they'll pull together an agreement on the budget cuts.  The policy riders (defunding Planned Parenthood, rollback EPA, etc.) are currently viewed as the showstoppers, not the $$.

For whatever that's worth.

As an aside that I can't say much more about, has anyone noticed how all the talk about termination liability seems to have gone away?

[jongoff]

I honestly don't understand how people can want to shut down their roads, airports, the post office, all stock trading, the courthouses, no police, firefighters, etc.

Because it doesn't happen like that.  (why is someone outside the US explaining how the US government works to a local?  Because the locals are so ignorant?)  Special provisions are passed to fund all of those essential services.  See http://democrats.rules.house.gov/archives/98-844.pdf

The only thing that shuts down is the kind of superfluous spending that the government shouldn't be doing in the first place.  If you're a legitimate supporter of the tea party, or God forbid, you're a dyed in the wool libertarian, you should be hoping for a government shutdown every year.  Of course, it's impossible to both be one of them and also be a supporter of NASA spending.. so there wouldn't be any of them on this site

I once asked a libertarian friend at another rocket company in Mojave that made most its money from government contracts how he could square that with his political beliefs.  His reply was classic: "We know what we are, we're just haggling on the price..."

~Jon

[Downix]

I honestly don't understand how people can want to shut down their roads, airports, the post office, all stock trading, the courthouses, no police, firefighters, etc.

Because it doesn't happen like that.  (why is someone outside the US explaining how the US government works to a local?  Because the locals are so ignorant?)  Special provisions are passed to fund all of those essential services.  See http://democrats.rules.house.gov/archives/98-844.pdf

The only thing that shuts down is the kind of superfluous spending that the government shouldn't be doing in the first place.  If you're a legitimate supporter of the tea party, or God forbid, you're a dyed in the wool libertarian, you should be hoping for a government shutdown every year.  Of course, it's impossible to both be one of them and also be a supporter of NASA spending.. so there wouldn't be any of them on this site

Money only is allocated to keep those departments kept open *if* special provisions are funded.  My father was part of the team which wrote the provisions which kept those segments of government running during the 1995 shutdown.  With todays house/senate split, there is a serious chance of not all of these services would continue.  There are emergency funds for key departments, enabling them to wind-down, for instance the Military has a 30 day fund.  If the budget is not passed or a special provision is not resolved by the time these emergency funds are depleted, then even those department is shut down.

The situation with today is not the same as in '95, either.  In '95, we had a larger total in emergency funding.  In the interim years, different budget and bills have removed, eliminated, or "privatized" those funds, which means that today we are coming in with less than 20% of the funding to keep those units open we had in the last impasse. (I put privatized in parenthesis, for what happened was that the funds were modified to become investment pools, which then had to buy AAA rated bonds, such as mortgage backed securities, by law, with those pools)

[yg1968]

I honestly don't understand how people can want to shut down their roads, airports, the post office, all stock trading, the courthouses, no police, firefighters, etc.

Because it doesn't happen like that.  (why is someone outside the US explaining how the US government works to a local?  Because the locals are so ignorant?)  Special provisions are passed to fund all of those essential services.  See http://democrats.rules.house.gov/archives/98-844.pdf

The only thing that shuts down is the kind of superfluous spending that the government shouldn't be doing in the first place.  If you're a legitimate supporter of the tea party, or God forbid, you're a dyed in the wool libertarian, you should be hoping for a government shutdown every year.  Of course, it's impossible to both be one of them and also be a supporter of NASA spending.. so there wouldn't be any of them on this site

From the article that you linked, only governmental services essential to emergency situations would still be provided if a government shutdown occurs:

There have been Attorney General opinions holding that the Antideficiency Act (31 U.S.C. 1341, et seq.), as amended, prohibits the federal government from spending during lapsed appropriations, entering into contracts or other obligations, and providing government services and employees beyond those essential “to emergency situations, where the failure to perform those functions would result in an imminent threat to the safety of human life or the protection of property.”7 Emergency situations under which federal employees may work, without compensation, do not include ongoing, regular functions of government, the suspension of which would not imminently threaten the safety of human life or the protection of property (31 U.S.C. 1342).

[QuantumG]

So basically everything that Downix listed, yes.. that's what I said.

[robertross]

Obviously just guessing, but how long do people here figure this 'could' last?

I say this because I think back to Bill Gerstenmaier's comment (a while back) to fly STS-135 as late as possible, something like August. Now of course this has been moved up, but perhaps it could slip back to an August timeframe with 'hopefully' enough time to make up for the lost time during a shutdown to get back up to speed on crew training & ops.

Gerst did/does want to go later and so does Suff but it was moved forward because of budget. I talked with crew over the weekend; they've been told it's not gonna slip into August, period.  Not enough money left to fly in August. 

If shutdown occurs and goes longer than a couple of weeks, there won't be enough time in the "budget envelope" or money at the end of that to pay for STS135.  That's what we're hearing. 

Thanks.

I don't suppose there would be a case for NASA to go before congress after the fact with 'hat-in-hand' for supplemental funds for the shuttle launch? Or to get an allowance to (heaven help me for saying this) divert funds from SLS (block 0) in 2012 to pay for it? After all, this is what you get when you cancel a program before having a follow-on capability ready.

Last one first, you can't legally appropriate money backwards in time.

First one next, given the mood and complete inability to do their damn jobs in Congress (re: budget accord) the odds of getting supplemental anything for 135 are about nil - tho' that's one woman's opinion.  Would NASA "HEO" / HQ look for the money internally and externally?  Sure.

--- I paused halfway through writing this post to take the pulse of Legislative Affairs folk at NASA HQ, and they're starting to hear that House/Senate aren't more than a few B apart...there is a growing consensus that they'll pull together an agreement on the budget cuts.  The policy riders (defunding Planned Parenthood, rollback EPA, etc.) are currently viewed as the showstoppers, not the $$.

For whatever that's worth.

Worth a lot, thank you very much.
Figured they couldn't pass back.

I almost hate to think what could be pared back internaly to make up the shortfall (if it came to that). No need to respond, just the thought of it pains me.

As an aside that I can't say much more about, has anyone noticed how all the talk about termination liability seems to have gone away?

Wasn't really on my 'radar', but yeah, come to think of it, we haven't heard boo for quite some time. Can't wait to see/hear how they worked around THAT particular issue (wrt CxP).

Oh joy. (irked)

[yg1968]

Obviously just guessing, but how long do people here figure this 'could' last?

I say this because I think back to Bill Gerstenmaier's comment (a while back) to fly STS-135 as late as possible, something like August. Now of course this has been moved up, but perhaps it could slip back to an August timeframe with 'hopefully' enough time to make up for the lost time during a shutdown to get back up to speed on crew training & ops.

Gerst did/does want to go later and so does Suff but it was moved forward because of budget. I talked with crew over the weekend; they've been told it's not gonna slip into August, period.  Not enough money left to fly in August. 

If shutdown occurs and goes longer than a couple of weeks, there won't be enough time in the "budget envelope" or money at the end of that to pay for STS135.  That's what we're hearing. 

Thanks.

I don't suppose there would be a case for NASA to go before congress after the fact with 'hat-in-hand' for supplemental funds for the shuttle launch? Or to get an allowance to (heaven help me for saying this) divert funds from SLS (block 0) in 2012 to pay for it? After all, this is what you get when you cancel a program before having a follow-on capability ready.

Last one first, you can't legally appropriate money backwards in time.

First one next, given the mood and complete inability to do their damn jobs in Congress (re: budget accord) the odds of getting supplemental anything for 135 are about nil - tho' that's one woman's opinion.  Would NASA "HEO" / HQ look for the money internally and externally?  Sure.

--- I paused halfway through writing this post to take the pulse of Legislative Affairs folk at NASA HQ, and they're starting to hear that House/Senate aren't more than a few B apart...there is a growing consensus that they'll pull together an agreement on the budget cuts.  The policy riders (defunding Planned Parenthood, rollback EPA, etc.) are currently viewed as the showstoppers, not the $$.

For whatever that's worth.

As an aside that I can't say much more about, has anyone noticed how all the talk about termination liability seems to have gone away?

If you read the articles in Politico and the Hill, the disagreement is now over what to cut and on some additional measures including health care. Republican seem to be saying that they could trade the policy riders for more cuts. 

[pathfinder_01]

I honestly don't understand how people can want to shut down their roads, airports, the post office, all stock trading, the courthouses, no police, firefighters, etc.

Roads don't shut down nor does stock trading. Only federal courthouse might shutdown city, state, and county courts still go on. Police and firefighters are local government services not federal ones.  There are Federal policing agencies but the FBI, ATF,ect. don't handle most local crime.

Airports in theory could shutdown due to the controllers being federal employees but they are considered essential and so they won’t. Post office can shut down. A Federal shutdown is bad but local governments provide most government services.

[mjcrsmith]

Is this Nasaspaceflight.com or on online PolySci 101 course?

Does anyone have any actual information on this topic to share?

[sdsds]

Bolden said NASA does not expect to solicit industry proposals for the heavy-lift launch vehicle development for “at least a year,” [and that] NASA would seek outside cost estimates for the new architecture.

The procurement process can definitely take awhile.  That fact, this quote, and the quote from Holdren make is seem NASA and OSTP leadership simply don't care about how long it would take them to get SLS flying.  Specifically, they don't seem to care if they miss the deadline set in the law that authorizes the existence of NASA. 

They seem to expect NASA will still exist if they miss that deadline, and seem blind or uncaring about any the other possibility.

[RocketEconomist327]

You mean like NASA?  The Agency will shut down.  Sky King

NASA will not shut down vital operations.  This is about the most absurd thing I have seen here in awhile.

You think they are just going to empty out the ISS control room and say, "Sorry, we have no budget.  Good luck!"? 

No, NASA will not come to a screeching halt.  Some things obviously will but to say "The Agency" will shut down is just plain wrong.

RE327

[Downix]

Now I am confused.  You said it doesn't work like that, you listed an article, I countered with the actual mechanisms in place which countered your argument, and this is your reply.  You seriously have me confuzzled.

Everything you said falls clearly under “[those services essential] to emergency situations, where the failure to perform those functions would result in an imminent threat to the safety of human life or the protection of property.”

For example, if people are rioting in the streets, or there's a house burning down or... should I list every one of your essential services?  There is no situation where the police will stop functioning or stop being paid.. similar for firefighters.. even if the government was essentially bankrupt (ok, more essentially bankrupt) resulting in hyperinflation, police and firefighters would still get paid.. they might not get paid enough to buy bread but they'd still get paid.

I'm starting to think you're not actually ignorant of all this, you're just trolling to make a point.. or scaremongering.  Either way, this is all offtopic, move on.

*only* if the house and senate agree on the special provision to keep them open.  I am pointing out that with the current climate, the passing of these provisions may be far more difficult than it seems. 

No special provision is needed. It's the opposite, only non-essential services are forced to shutdown because of the lack of an appropriation bill or CR:

http://www.boston.com/news/politics/articles/2011/03/16/in_a_government_shutdown_not_everything_would_halt/

You need the provision to label a department as essential in order to prevent shutdown.  That is the issue, as of right now, the list of essential government positions is obsolete, written in 1987, and over 3/4 of the positions listed no longer exist, have been retitled, migrated to new departments, etc.  The Airports, for instance, would be shutdown due to the entire security apparatus being not on the essential list.  The military operations in the middle east would also be forced to shut down due to the "essential" portion of it being provided based on those operating in the European theatre and the middle east division being non-essential on that list. 

[SkyKing]

You mean like NASA?  The Agency will shut down.  Sky King

NASA will not shut down vital operations.  This is about the most absurd thing I have seen here in awhile.

You think they are just going to empty out the ISS control room and say, "Sorry, we have no budget.  Good luck!"? 

No, NASA will not come to a screeching halt.  Some things obviously will but to say "The Agency" will shut down is just plain wrong.

RE327

no they wont empty out the ISS control room but most of NASA will take a furlough.  An open question is how many of the folks working toward the next launch campaign will stay "on the job"...ie if that is essential since the shuttle will not have launched. 

Sorry poor choice of words on my part...but most of the employees will not come to work. 

Sky King