There's an article in the Houston Chronicle about the cuts to NASA's 2005 budget request. The Majority Leader does seem to be on the warpath about it:

House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, the Sugar Land Republican whose district includes NASA's Johnson Space Center, called the cuts "unacceptable," then warned: "It would be very hard to get this bill to the floor if it's unacceptable to me."

DeLay, the second-highest-ranking House Republican, schedules measures for floor consideration and wields considerable power over spending bills.

So, why?

I haven't looked at the cuts in detail, but they seems mainly to affect the president's new vision. One of the biggest cuts is in the Prometheus Program (largely Jupiter Icy Moons Orbiter at this point), most of which would go to California (JPL and whatever contractor is selected) and DOE labs for the reactor work. No money for JSC there. The general exploration activities, including CEV, are nominally funded out of Houston, but it's managed at HQ and will go to contractors all over the place. Shuttle is fully funded, as is ISS. This action doesn't seem to be bad for JSC at all, all things considered, from a pork perspective.

So why is DeLay up in arms about it? He is supposedly, after all, one of those Republicans who are supposed to be concerned about federal spending.

Theory 1: He's greedy, and assumes that any budget cuts will affect JSC to some degree, however minor (probably a valid assumption).

Theory 2: He wants to support the president in his budget request, out of loyalty to the White House.

Theory 3: He actually believes in the vision, and wants it to be funded this coming year.

Theory 1 doesn't seem worth holding up an appropriations bill over. I've got to surmise that it's theories 2 and 3 in some proportion. Can it be that the Hammer has become a space nut?

What do you suppose minority leader Pelosi's position is on the NASA budget? If by some miracle the Democrats take back majority control of the House of Representatives, can you imagine the damage that ultra-liberal Pelosi could inflict on American policy as the new majority leader? You could certainly kiss manned space exploration goodbye for starters.

What do you suppose minority leader Pelosi's position is on the NASA budget? If by some miracle the Democrats take back majority control of the House of Representatives, can you imagine the damage that ultra-liberal Pelosi could inflict on American policy as the new majority leader? You could certainly kiss manned space exploration goodbye for starters.

Of course a varietnt of (1) is that Delay is taking the long view. If the shuttle is going away, with all those jobs, then something has to take it's place, or else Delay has a lot of unhappy constituents on his hands. The Moon, Mars, and Beyond Initiative would seem to fit the bill, especially if some of the jobs generated are private sector.

Brad --

Pelosi leadership would also spell the end to all new nuclear power initiatives, both in space and on Earth. To me that's a lot worse than the end of manned space program, since nuclear fission (and in longer term, fusion) is the only realistic replacement for fossil fuels.

Pelosi is pretty awful, but she understands what gets -- and keeps -- people elected. The trouble, then, is not Pelosi qua Pelosi, but that if the Dems take back the House by some miracle, the wins will be in the suburbs, not the south. As such, Pelosi won't fund NASA programs because they won't do much for her base.

Re: Pelosi - It will all depend on how many Blue Dogs survive in Texas; there will be no Speaker Pelosi if the Democrats don't hold the line in the new districts. There also is the strong possiblity of an open TX Senate seat in '04 (as the Lone State State gears up for the nastiest Republican gubernatorial primary ever), which will influence Democratic Congressional priorities.

If Tom Delay is supporting Bush's announced veto on the House bill, and he is doing it for reasons 2 or 3, or some combination, the pragmatic side of me is jumping for joy!. On the other hand, we are a long way from a final resolution for NASA FY 2005 funding.There is much more to come.

Nancy Pelosi is a scary woman, in more ways than one.I can spot a leftist liberal on the far side of the moon, and she just plain scares me. She would oppose VSE because Bush started it, VSE doesn't do anything for her constituents directly or immediately (Arena based decision making rears it's ugly head again) and she just plain doesn't give a flying saucer about space development/settlement.

All the more reason to, if not Vote Republican, be a single issue voter for VSE and the future, even if it is the lesser of two evils to you, and save the baby while contemplating throwing out the tainted bath water.