Senators Signal They're Prepared To Push Back Against NASA Cuts (bloomberg.com)
- Reference: 0178327152
- News link: https://science.slashdot.org/story/25/07/10/161254/senators-signal-theyre-prepared-to-push-back-against-nasa-cuts
- Source link: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-07-10/senators-signal-they-re-prepared-to-push-back-against-nasa-cuts
The bipartisan pushback directly contradicts President Donald Trump's budget request, which sought to slash NASA's science portfolio funding nearly in half and terminate dozens of operating and planned missions. "We rejected cuts that would have devastated NASA science by 47% and would have terminated 55 operating and planned missions," Senator Chris Van Hollen, a Democrat from Maryland, said.
The Senate bill allocates $7.3 billion for science programs. Senators also refused the administration's call to cancel the Space Launch System rocket and Orion crew capsule after their third flights, programs Trump's budget labeled "grossly expensive and delayed." "The bill reflects an ambitious approach to space exploration, prioritizing the agency's flagship program, Artemis, and rejecting premature termination of systems like SLS and Orion before commercial replacements are ready," said Senator Jerry Moran, a Kansas Republican.
[1] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-07-10/senators-signal-they-re-prepared-to-push-back-against-nasa-cuts
Hand wringing (Score:1)
Will they actually *do* something this time, or just participate in "Public Lamentation Theater" like a couple of weeks ago?
Does it matter? (Score:5, Insightful)
Regardless of whatever budget Congress sets, the majority party has already been clear that they have no intent to enforce it. If the president uses the NASA money for something else, or even just puts it into his own personal pocket, we can be confident that he won't be impeached, and if impeached, he won't be convicted.
The only thing that matters is the total budget. The president is free to spend that total however he wishes. This isn't the law as written, but it's the law defacto. If voters have a problem with that (do they?) they can choose a different party to be the majority.
lying blowhards (Score:5, Insightful)
bullshit. The time to push back was BEFORE you voted for this POS legislation. Complaining after you approved it just proves how weak, pathetic and bought off you are. None of you care one shit about the American people. You're all just corporate shills and/or MAGA't zombicons.
Re: (Score:2)
Umm it is before...
Big Beautiful Act, was for 'mandatory spending'; Congress will now pass several appropriations bills between now middle September for 'discretionary' spending.
Some of the negative covfefe around the BBA is fair but a lot of it is just negative partisan propaganda that only works because they convinced a huge portion of their base that just because the had a degree, or whatever that must mean they also know someone about the federal budget and political process that generates it. When the
Re: (Score:2)
> The Inflation Reduction Act was also mostly garbage, just the other side of the same broken coin.
Sure, the Republican side of the coin wants to pretend global warming isnt happening and defunds large amounts of policies that have been set up by multiple administrations to help combat it as they've just done with their budget bill. The Democratic side of the coin acknowledges that global warming is in fact real and that we need to collectively do something about it as seen in the inflation reduction act.
And yes, I will take some government waste (which there likely was with the IRA) over inaction on the
Boeing (Score:3)
Can't cut Starliner! It's such a successful program! Oh wait...
Re: (Score:2)
Orion is not Starliner.
Re: (Score:2)
Starliner and SLS are often associated with one another. They're both crap and over budget.
Now watch the ideological capture of /. (Score:1, Interesting)
There will be a wave of posts about how these Brave Senators are fighting the Nasty Orange Fascist Tyrant and his anti-Science agenda(tm).
When in fact, let's be clear:
- SLS is an hilariously borderline disaster. Behind by years, $billions beyond budget, tests constantly fail. And it basically doesn't work.
[1]https://caseyhandmer.wordpress... [wordpress.com]
- Should we talk about how their original mandate was more or less just to REbuild the Saturn V/Apollo a little bigger with modern materials? You know, that system that
[1] https://caseyhandmer.wordpress.com/2024/10/02/sls-is-still-a-national-disgrace/
Re: (Score:2)
And yet, the F-35, highly over budget in every area and [1]rife with hundreds of problems [defensenews.com], continues to be funded rather than just be killed. In fact, 13 years after first production, Lockheed Martin is still sending jets off the assembly line [2]with quality defects [stripes.com]
Needless to say, Lockheed's response is [3]they need more money [b17news.com]:
> A Lockheed representative said that addressing these issues comes down to reliably investing in parts and maintenance. Edward Smith, the companyâ(TM)s F-35 business development director, said that âoeto maintain a fleet at any given readiness level, you have to fully fund your supply system.â
>
> Smith said that the F-35 has historically been underfunded in terms of the supply purchased for the aircraft and depot repair capacity, adding that itâ(TM)s important to get the supply of sustainment parts at a level that matches the jetâ(TM)s readiness needs.
[1] https://www.defensenews.com/smr/hidden-troubles-f35/
[2] https://www.stripes.com/theaters/us/2025-02-03/f-35-production-quality-issues-pentagon-16705254.html
[3] https://b17news.com/a-lockheed-exec-tells-bi-whats-needed-to-fix-the-f-35s-biggest-problems/
Kinda late to signal now (Score:2)
Hey idiots, you had power before
SLS (Score:2)
> Senators also refused the administration's call to cancel the Space Launch System
It wasn't nicknamed the "Senate Launch System" for nothing.
Re: (Score:2)
> It wasn't nicknamed the "Senate Launch System" for nothing.
You misspelled "lunch"
Short Sighted (Score:2)
The NASA budget is such a small part of the overall United States budget that it's just short sighted to cut it, I'm sure there are plenty of other things that can be cut instead
How about the NIH ? (Score:5, Informative)
They are cutting NIH (National Institute of Health) funding from 47 billion to $20 billion even though thanks to NIH research death rates from diseases like cancer have reduced by 30% of the last couple of decades. Reference: [1]https://www.ctpost.com/lifesty... [ctpost.com]
And yes included in the cutbacks is $2.7 billion from the National Cancer Institute: [2]https://www.theguardian.com/us... [theguardian.com]
[1] https://www.ctpost.com/lifestyle/renew-houston/health/article/Cancer-death-rate-declines-sharply-partly-thanks-14960731.php
[2] https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/jun/26/cancer-research-trump-nci-cuts-plan
Re:How about the NIH ? (Score:5, Insightful)
So NASA is a cash cow for multiple districts. Especially ones in red States. I haven't looked in a while but they were entire cities that basically popped up and are completely dependent on there NASA jobs.
It's basically pure pork but good pork. But of course everybody else is pork is always bad pork.
We should be moving away from a competitive civilization to a cooperative one but as soon as you suggest that everyone thinks you're a big wussy. Never mind the fact that we are fundamentally a social species. Unfortunately tribalism came with that deal...
Re: (Score:1)
Libertarian crap like this is just that: crap. Space is not "competition". Space is dangerous, hard... and is not a cash cow like some New Smartphone With New Features That No One Ever Asked For. "Competition" as you describe it is more like the Pennsy and the NYC running tracks not a mile apart to Chicago.
We're still at the explore and experiment. There's no "competition" for studies in the Antarctic.
Re: (Score:1)
And yet it's been private companies like SpaceX that have done far more to advance humanity's space faring capabilities than NASA has of recent. Your example also sucks because the railroads only did that to take advantage of idiotic government policies that handed out taxpayer money without any consideration for whether it did something useful. Incidentally rail fare was cheapest on routes where there was competition and most expensive where exclusive monopolies existed, so I'm not sure what you thought yo
Re:How about the NIH ? (Score:4, Interesting)
> And yet it's been private companies like SpaceX that have done far more to advance humanity's space faring capabilities than NASA has of recent.
In launch services yes but outside of manned spacecraft NASA has always relied on contractors and even those were all NASA designs built by contractors. Titan rockets the Voyager probes flew on were a product of Martin Corp.
Also SpaceX was built on the foundations of all that NASA knowhow built over decades. Did they have to material science their own heatshield material? No, NASA said here take our PICA and use that.
Not to discount what SpaceX has done which is very impressive but it's a sterling example of the power of public/private cooperation, not "free market private actors".
Re: (Score:2)
>> And yet it's been private companies like SpaceX that have done far more to advance humanity's space faring capabilities than NASA has of recent.
> In launch services yes but outside of manned spacecraft NASA has always relied on contractors and even those were all NASA designs built by contractors. Titan rockets the Voyager probes flew on were a product of Martin Corp.
> Also SpaceX was built on the foundations of all that NASA knowhow built over decades. Did they have to material science their own heatshield material? No, NASA said here take our PICA and use that.
> Not to discount what SpaceX has done which is very impressive but it's a sterling example of the power of public/private cooperation, not "free market private actors".
What pure science has Spacex done? I mean to hear the cult talk, Elon Invented the Rocket. Granted, he designed and built the Voyager probes, the Saturn rockets and landed the first people on the moon/ When are people going to realize that we don't need NASA any more, only Spacex /s
Re: (Score:1)
> And yet it's been private companies like SpaceX that have done far more to advance humanity's space faring capabilities than NASA has of recent.
That would smell a lot more like a libertarian success story, if SpaceX hadn't received billions of dollars in government subsidies. But since We The People paid for it in taxes, instead of private investors, it's merely just another government success story.
Agreed, though, that Space X has kicked major ass. Regardless of however we think they're "supposed to" do it
Re: (Score:2)
What a load of tripe.
NASA continues to run groundbreaking missions. "Competition" from the private sector is nothing more than the private sector taking space technology from Nasa, then getting huge government kickbacks (SpaceEx), and using that.
There is no 'competition' in space without the government kickbacks, and the reason THAT is happening is pretty simple: Corporate Welfare.
Re: (Score:2)
> What a load of tripe. NASA continues to run groundbreaking missions. "Competition" from the private sector is nothing more than the private sector taking space technology from Nasa, then getting huge government kickbacks (SpaceEx), and using that.
Spacex is following in the tradition of companies like:
First stage of the Saturn V: Boeing
Second stage of the Saturn V: North American Aviation (which has since become part of Boeing)
Third stage of the Saturn V: Douglas (also now under Boeing)
Instrument unit for the Saturn V: IBM
Engines for the Saturn V: Rocketdyne (now operating as Aerojet Rocketdyne)
For the Apollo spacecraft:
Command and Service Module (CSM): North American Aviation
Lunar Module (LM): Grumman (now part of Northrop Grumman)
Servic
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
> Lack of competition is why NASA ultimately devolved into little more than pork projects. Competition from the private sector has made them irrelevant for any actual space travel or other projects.
You do realize that this "competition from the private sector" was entirely the result of NASA funding, right? The current poster-child for private spaceflight, SpaceX, developed their workhorse Falcon-9 from NASA funding (the space station commercial resupply and commercial crew programs), because NASA invested in them at a time when SpaceX's entire record of rocket launches consisted of three attempts to launch their Falcon-1 rocket resulting in three failures.
Re: (Score:1)
> So NASA is a cash cow for multiple districts. Especially ones in red States. I haven't looked in a while but they were entire cities that basically popped up and are completely dependent on there NASA jobs. It's basically pure pork but good pork. But of course everybody else is pork is always bad pork. We should be moving away from a competitive civilization to a cooperative one but as soon as you suggest that everyone thinks you're a big wussy. Never mind the fact that we are fundamentally a social species. Unfortunately tribalism came with that deal...
Socialist communist, not wussy. Which, of course, is far worse.
Some would say we're "evolving" out of being a social species and that that is a positive thing. Because greed overcoming decency is apparently a net positive? I dunno. I tend to glaze over when I start having it explained to me that treating each other with respect is somehow going to cause the world to end.
Re: (Score:2)
In space... no one can hear you cough