- Payroll tax deal close: Why did Republicans back down? (+video)
- Israel says Bangkok, Delhi, and Tbilisi attacks all linked – to Iran
- Rick Santorum's new machine-gun ad: Will it work? (+video)
- As Sarkozy seeks new term, French are wary of 'Merkozy' (+video)
- Honduras prison fire kills more than 300, highlights regional problem (+video)
Congress calls for "time-out" on NASA's human space flight funding
Lawmakers have tapped the brakes on NASA's post-shuttle future. When the House appropriations subcommittee handed back President Obama's proposed $18.7 billion NASA budget last week, the bill was $483 million lighter.
Skip to next paragraphRecent posts
-
02.10.12
With new music hardware, Google takes aim at your living room -
02.10.12
iPad 3 rumors solidify around release window, but not features -
02.10.12
Google plans to challenge Dropbox with cloud-sync service: report -
02.09.12
Steve Jobs: FBI file says Apple CEO could 'distort reality' -
02.09.12
iPad 3 unveiling set for March: report
Most notable among the cuts was a 16 percent slash to the agency's budget for manned space exploration, originally weighing in at $4 billion.
The move "reflects the uncertainty surrounding NASA's current strategy for replacing the space shuttle and returning astronauts to the moon by 2020," wrote Space.com.
Rep. Alan Mollohan (D) of West Virginia, chairman of the subcommittee, stressed that the cuts did not mean Congress has lost faith in NASA. Instead, the congressmen are waiting for the results of a 10-member panel that's looking into the future of manned mission.
With NASA's shuttle program coming to an end in 2010, the White House formed a commission, headed by former Lockheed Martin chief Norm Augustine, to investigate the Orion capsule, Ares I rocket, and the other technologies on the table. Their report should come in August.
The budget cut is "a deferral taken without prejudice; it is a pause, a time-out, to allow the president to establish his vision for human space exploration and to commit to realistic future funding levels to realize this vision," Mollohan said during the June 4 subcommittee meeting.
Mr. Augustine has already said that his panel is not bound to the current plan, known as Constellation.
"We will be looking at different architectures, as well as the existing architecture, and I am not in a position to make any predictions," he said during a briefing in May. "We have been asked to provide options."
As Peter N. Spotts, the Monitor's science correspondent, wrote last month:
One important political factor that could keep Constellation on track: Without it, US astronauts would have to rely on Russian Soyuz launches to reach the International Space Station far longer than they would otherwise would. An approach other than Constellation would take years to develop. It is a potential gap in US capabilities that former NASA administrator Michael Griffin called "unseemly."








These comments are not screened before publication. Constructive debate about the above story is welcome, but personal attacks are not. Please do not post comments that are commercial in nature or that violate any copyright[s]. Comments that we regard as obscene, defamatory, or intended to incite violence will be removed. If you find a comment offensive, you may flag it.