Author Topic: FY2011 Senate and House (Compromise) Thread (2) - Sept. 23 onwards  (Read 220616 times)

Offline psloss

  • Veteran armchair spectator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17980
  • Liked: 4047
  • Likes Given: 2089
With the President's signature now on the NASA Authorization act, the struggle can begin in earnest regarding NASA FY11 Appropriations.  The Oct 8 letter signed by Gordon, Hall, Giffords and Olson already seems to have thrown down the gauntlet, with its "NASA should determine the best approach" language and characterization of the Act as "very prescriptive" of a wrong-sized vehicle.

To keep their horse in the race they will want:

* continuation of 5 segment SRM development
* full funding for 5.5 m upper stage tanks, avionics and J-2X
* no short cuts in the contract award process for the SLS core.

And delay is totally on their side, right?
It's more complicated than that; there are other challenges.  The election result and trends will play a big role in how the lame-duck session goes.

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37441
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21451
  • Likes Given: 428
This would figure at being done quietly on a day when there were a lot of other presidential things for the media to talk about. This bill is a pretty hefty rebuke of the administration's proposal and it is best signed and then have the president get otta town to a high profile event where he can speak in front of a very friendly crowd much more open to media and friendly coverage. Politically that works for the administration.



How is it a rebuke?  There is more of the FY2011 proposal than not in the bill.  Also CxP is gone.  The current bill is FY2011 plus an HLV five years earlier.

Also, FY2011 is not dead nor is an HLV a give.  There still is the appropriations bill

Offline chrisking0997

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 355
  • NASA Langley
  • Liked: 127
  • Likes Given: 317
when can we expect the appropriations process to begin?
Tried to tell you, we did.  Listen, you did not.  Now, screwed we all are.

Offline Pheogh

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 987
  • Liked: 153
  • Likes Given: 39
With the President's signature now on the NASA Authorization act, the struggle can begin in earnest regarding NASA FY11 Appropriations.  The Oct 8 letter signed by Gordon, Hall, Giffords and Olson already seems to have thrown down the gauntlet, with its "NASA should determine the best approach" language and characterization of the Act as "very prescriptive" of a wrong-sized vehicle.

To keep their horse in the race they will want:

* continuation of 5 segment SRM development
* full funding for 5.5 m upper stage tanks, avionics and J-2X
* no short cuts in the contract award process for the SLS core.

And delay is totally on their side, right?
It's more complicated than that; there are other challenges.  The election result and trends will play a big role in how the lame-duck session goes.


And didn't someone say earlier that we may have seen the last of G.G.

Offline Jeff Bingham

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1592
  • aka "51-D Mascot"
  • Liked: 38
  • Likes Given: 56
when can we expect the appropriations process to begin?

Three weeks ago...already underway in prep for an attempted Omnibus Appropriations bill, with another CR as a backup to get into next year.
Offering only my own views and experience as a long-time "Space Cadet."

Offline zerm

  • Hypergolic cartoonist
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1319
    • GWS Books dot com
  • Liked: 34
  • Likes Given: 19
This would figure at being done quietly on a day when there were a lot of other presidential things for the media to talk about. This bill is a pretty hefty rebuke of the administration's proposal and it is best signed and then have the president get otta town to a high profile event where he can speak in front of a very friendly crowd much more open to media and friendly coverage. Politically that works for the administration.



How is it a rebuke?  There is more of the FY2011 proposal than not in the bill.  Also CxP is gone.  The current bill is FY2011 plus an HLV five years earlier.

Also, FY2011 is not dead nor is an HLV a give.  There still is the appropriations bill

Your opinion Jim- worth the paper it's written on. It's a REBUKE, read the bill, watch the hearings and while you're at it quits stalking my posts- frankly I'm tired of having to respond to one of your pointless contridictions every time I post. Seek therapy.

Offline Lars_J

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6160
  • California
  • Liked: 677
  • Likes Given: 195
zerm: pot - kettle - black. Draw the conclusion.

Offline renclod

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1671
  • EU.Ro
  • Liked: 17
  • Likes Given: 2
No funds for CxP close-out


Offline Chris Bergin

I think we can close this one now before too many people get their knickers in a twist.
Support NSF via L2 -- Help improve NSF -- Site Rules/Feedback/Updates
**Not a L2 member? Whitelist this forum in your adblocker to support the site and ensure full functionality.**

Tags:
 

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