Clinton did almost nothing to increase space spending his whole time in office despite many years of good economic times and even budget surpluses. During his administration, NASA mismanagement allowed billions in overruns on the ISS.
Bush comes into office and has to face an economy that began slowing last year, surpluses that disappeared in large part due to the slowing economy and now a war. As a result, Bush is having to make some hard choices and something has to give. Sadly, it looks like space is one of those things. I do hope that you can see the bigger picture beyond partisan politics.
Sure, I'd like to see a more robust space program. However, until the economy improves, it isn't likely to happen. The war on terrorism alone is costing about a billion per month, nearly equal to NASA's budget. Congress has just added 28,000 federal employees to screen luggage at airports (while seemingly ignoring everyone else at airports who has access to planes), and I doubt the $2.50 surcharge on tickets will cover all of that expense. Congress has allocated billions to cover things like losses due to terrorism and to bail out the airline industry. Like I said, something has to give. We can't afford everything.
Space/Science » in reply to Why don't we both be honest
Complicating factors
The whole thread (43 posts)
- Bush wants to axe both Pluto and Europa missions
- Sounds like years of bad NASA management are coming back to haught them
- Re: Bush wants to axe both Pluto and Europa missions
- We're lucky we're getting as much done in space as we are.
- What's particularly outrageous and aggravating...
- Speaking of outrageous...
- Careful, Tom, you're gonna sprain that knee
- My knee is well-conditioned, thanks.
- Re: Careful, Tom, you're gonna sprain that knee
- Careful, Tom, you're gonna sprain that knee
- Speaking of outrageous...