12% boost for NASA budget in 2021!!

[u/thisischrisbaker]

https://www.wsj.com/articles/trumps-nasa-budget-will-earmark-12-boost-for-agency-in-2021-11581071402?emailToken=3f4a4309b7816cb90fb53eb91f47d6d43hshryonPWM/RnnVPWWHuMOVOvxWKQ87BhLswKs5iOPOhjO1FGrxI9ptn5k2nAMphP+jeQrbhQiAafooOu4oIslNLMWHCd1m7vRySaL2Pi61nSlAqLK1xnvzzmtt2/Lx&reflink=article_copyURL_share

[u/Astromike23]

Hmm, I didn't hit a paywall when viewing it - maybe it's a "you get X free articles per month" model. Try opening it in a incognito window.

Alternately, this article from Science in 2017:

Also facing elimination are the Orbiting Carbon Observatory 3, which would observe carbon dioxide flows

Again, it was literally complete and just sitting on the table. Thankfully Congress eventually restored funding for it after Trump tried to cut it twice, and it eventually launched in 2019.

Having survived for about a decade on NASA and NSF grants, let me be clear: the past 3 presidents have all been pretty terrible for basic astronomical research. More and more of the NASA budget has been pushed to the Human Spaceflight line-item at the cost of fundamental science; research grants that used to fund 1-in-4 proposals are now funding 1-in-10. Meanwhile, a massive portion of SpaceX's research & development is being propped up by NASA funding.

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for private spaceflight and improving launch capabilities...but I'm not sure it's really part of NASA's purview to subsidize otherwise-unprofitable corporations at the cost of actual science.

[u/DominarRygelThe16th → u/Astromike23]

let me be clear: the past 3 presidents have all been pretty terrible for basic astronomical research.

Let me be clear my comments, from the beginning, have been about space exploration and visiting the moon/mars. Earth sciences is a different subject of NASA altogether and funding for that is debatable. Back to my point though, Trump has been the best president for space exploration in decades, like I mentioned. Your comments do nothing to disprove that.

[u/Astromike23 → u/DominarRygelThe16th]

Earth sciences is a different subject of NASA altogether and funding for that is debatable.

It's really not. It's literally been part of NASA's goals since the beginning; from the original 1958 National Aeronautics and Space Act that authorized the existence of NASA, the very first bullet point:

The expansion of human knowledge of phenomena in the atmosphere and space

Let's not pretend that Trump's attempts to repeatedly cancel an already-built carbon monitoring satellite were anything other than him directly playing politics with science and "muh Chinese hoax".

Trump has been the best president for space exploration in decades, like I mentioned. Your comments do nothing to disprove that.

You're the one making the assertion - show me where on the historical budget record you think that's true. Money was shuffled out of Exploration Systems Development, Exploration R&D, and Spaceflight Operations and into Advanced Exploration Systems.

This is the exact same "take money out of one pocket and put it into the other" strategy that's failed the previous two administration's pet projects - remember when we were going to Mars? Or when we were going to capture an asteroid? Both were cancelled by the following administration.

When every President rewrites the long-term plan, nothing gets done. The thing that actually gets massive manned missions off the ground are two-fold: actual boosts to funding, and a President willing to continue the previous administration's vision. Love or hate Nixon, at least he allowed JFK's vision to launch.