Mikulski Renews Pledge to Increase NASA’s Budget, Fight for $1 Billion Repayment for Columbia Costs

“This is a budget of lost opportunities.”

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Noting that this year marks such milestones as the 50th anniversary of NASA’s creation and the 25th anniversary of Dr. Sally Ride’s voyage as the first American woman in space, Commerce, Justice, Science (CJS) Appropriations Subcommittee Chairwoman Barbara A. Mikulski (D-Md.) expressed her concern for the future of NASA’s budget and the nation’s space program. At today’s subcommittee hearing, Senator Mikulski pledged to fight again for $1 billion to pay back the agency for the costs of returning the Space Shuttle to flight. National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Administrator Michael Griffin presented his priorities as the subcommittee considers President Bush’s fiscal year 2009 budget requests.

“Science at NASA saves lives, saves the planet, and creates jobs for the future, so I am puzzled why the President’s budget flat-funds NASA science this year and for the next five years. With almost no real growth in NASA’s budget, NASA needs more resources to accomplish all of its missions,” said Chairwoman Mikulski. “The budget is tight and we face tough choices. We need to be smart and fiscally responsible. There is no room for error, and cost overruns are unacceptable. I look forward to hearing from Dr. Griffin about how we can best fund NASA to maintain U.S. leadership in space, science and aeronautics, as well as how NASA will ensure stewardship of taxpayer dollars.”

The 2009 CJS spending bill is Senator Mikulski’s third attempt to gain approval of her $1 billion NASA amendment. In 1987, Congress allocated $2.7 billion in the aftermath of the Challenger tragedy to pay for a replacement shuttle. In the aftermath of the Columbia tragedy, however, NASA was not given any additional funding to repair the remaining shuttles. The amendment will pay back the costs of returning the Shuttle to flight and restore cuts to science, aeronautics and exploration programs that were cut in order to pay for the return to flight.

The amendment was included in both the 2008 and 2007 CJS spending bills, but did not receive final passage. Joining Senator Mikulski in sponsoring the amendment are CJS Ranking Member Richard Shelby (R-Ala.) and Ranking Member of the Science and Space Subcommittee on the Senate Commerce Committee Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-Texas).

Senator Mikulski’s opening statement, as prepared, is below:

“Good morning and welcome. Today the Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice and Science (CJS) will hear from NASA Administrator Dr. Michael Griffin about NASA’s budget request and priorities. This is Administrator Griffin’s fourth appearance before the CJS subcommittee. We have had a very productive relationship with him and his team.

“This year we honor important milestones in America’s space program,including the 50th anniversary of NASA’s creation and the 25th anniversary of the first American woman in space, Dr. Sally Ride.

“We are also in a year of transition. By this time next year, we will have a new President. Whatever we do in this year’s budget will be the operating budget for the first year of the new presidency. As Chairwoman this year, I want to make sure we put the right resources into the checkbook. I also want to ensure that America’s space program remains number one in the world.

“I’m disappointed that the President’s 2009 budget request for NASA is stagnant. The request is $17.6 billion – just $300 million above the 2008 omnibus level. A 1.8 percent increase does not keep up with inflation. Science is held steady at $4.4 billion. This only includes plans to launch five of 17 high priority Earth Science missions by 2020. Aeronautics research is cut by $65 million, for a total of just $447 million. There is no additional funding to help pay back NASA for the costs of returning the Shuttle to flight, perpetuating a five-year gap between the Shuttle’s retirement in 2010 and the launch of Orion and Ares in 2015. This is a budget of lost opportunities.

“I want to restore these opportunities and keep America’s space program number one in the world. That is why I will not yield in my fight to reimburse NASA for returning the Shuttle to flight safely. Since the Columbia accident in 2003, NASA has spent almost $3 billion to implement the safety recommendations of the Gehman Commission. $2.7 billion of NASA’s budget was diverted from science, aeronautics and exploration to pay for safety upgrades so we have safe human space flight. It should not be a question of ‘either or.’ We must remember what the original Augustine Commission said. We must have a balanced space program of human space exploration, a reliable space transportation system, scientific investments and aeronautics research.

“For science, the budget request totals $4.4 billion. Science at NASA is guided by decadal reports prepared by the National Academy of Sciences. These decadals are roadmaps for NASA science to ensure that science, not politics, drives the missions. Science at NASA saves lives, saves the planet, and creates jobs for the future, so I am puzzled why the budget flat-funds NASA science this year and for the next five years. We currently have important operating missions in progress such as ICESAT and TRMM that measure and monitor changes in the world’s ice sheets and rainforests, as well as our great telescopes like Hubble. How can we simultaneously maintain these projects and continue to develop important new missions like the James Webb Telescope or the ambitious new missions recommended by the decadal reports?

“For aeronautics research, the budget request is just $447 million, $65 million below the 2008 omnibus level. In 1998, the aeronautics budget at NASA was $1.5 billion. Today, it is less than $500 million. Every commercial aircraft flying today uses technology developed by NASA. We must maintain U. S. leadership in aeronautics.

“The budget request for the Space Shuttle is $3 billion. The budget calls for 10 more flights to the space station and one flight to serve the Hubble Telescope by 2010. Retiring the Shuttle and transitioning the workforce will be major challenges for NASA. The U.S. cannot afford to lose our science and engineering talent that makes our space program great and creates innovation in our economy. As our brave astronauts continue to perform amazing feats, their safety must remain the number one priority as we continue to fly the Shuttle and develop the next generation vehicle.

“The budget request for the next generation vehicle is $3 billion, almost $600 million above the 2008 level. I am absolutely committed to the goal of returning the U.S. astronauts to the Moon and maintaining a U.S. presence there. With other nations seeking to expand their presence in space, returning to the Moon is a strategic goal. NASA estimates it will cost $16 billion to build Ares and Orion. While this is a significant investment, there will still be a gap of almost five years between the retirement of the space shuttle and the launch of Orion and Ares. I want to know what we can do to minimize this time gap and the impact of the gap on our workforce. What is our path forward to keep getting U.S. astronauts to the Space Station safely?

“The budget request for the Space Station is $2 billion, $200 million above the 2008 omnibus level. The Space Station is a National Laboratory. We must keep our international commitments and make highest and best use of the Station for science. We also need to make sure we can re-supply the station once the Shuttle is retired. I fully support the COTS program, which is funded in this budget at $170 million, to develop technologies to get cargo to the station once the Shuttle is retired.

“The budget is tight and we face tough choices. We need to be smart and fiscally responsible. With almost no real growth in NASA’s budget, NASA needs more resources – more than the budget request – to accomplish all of its missions. At the same time, there is no room for error. Cost overruns are unacceptable. We look forward to hearing from Dr. Griffin about how we can best fund NASA to maintain U.S. leadership in space, science and aeronautics, as well as how NASA will ensure stewardship of taxpayer dollars.”