>Quite a bit down on the 5.5 per cent in the glory days of Apollo.
Funny how quickly that went away when the bill from Vietnam started coming due that and the OPEC shenanigans.
US Congress has approved a $1.3tr budget [PDF] that would see, among other science boosts, NASA's funding surpass $20bn. That $20.7bn check is $1.6bn more than expected. The spending bill will avoid a government shutdown and provide funding through September 30, provided President Donald Trump signs it off. Earlier today, he …
Unable to "land on the Moon before the decade was out".... NASA faked the "giant leap"....
The film and photos were obvious fakes, there are lunar landing logistics anomalies too !
"Military Top Secret Hollywood Film Studio" at TruthStreamMedia > Lookout Mountain pys-op
Bills ARE the problem - it's the other 1.3 trillion in deficit over and above income that's the issue.
Our congress puts it all into one bill...so there's no way to pass something good without also putting the pork on lobbyist tables. This is obviously deliberate - and it's not particularly partisan, they all do this.
So, put some nasty spending into the same bill with, say, education, someone votes against it, and next election the opponent claims the guy "voted against the children".
In this case, it's NASA (and a huge crap ton of total idiocy, all mixed in).
This is past getting old. These bums should _all_ be thrown out. Thing is, the lobbyists will just get the next guys...you know, they don't even read these bills, most of the time - just pass them to see what's in them.
Been watching this show for over 60 years. Hoping for change doesn't seem to work.
And for those 60 years (me too) there pops up at least one a Congressional session about "allowing line item vetoes" which hasn't happened yet as just about every CongressCritter doesn't want their pork to the voters cut off.
Tossing out the "bums" won't work as there's a new bunch waiting in line. And all backed by lobbyists with deep pockets of course.
None of them really wants line item veto because democrats don't want a republican president to veto their pork, and republicans don't want a democrat president to veto their pork.
Republicans only talk about it when democrats control congress, similar to how they only talk about how terrible deficits are when a democrat is in the White House. You sure didn't hear anything about the massive blowout deficit we're going to have thanks to this bill and the tax cuts - and this is with full employment...imagine how big it will get when there's a downturn (the odds of this happening sooner rather than later have increased now that Trump is going full trade war with China)
Supreme Court decided that the line item veto was unconstitutional twenty years ago. You'd have to get a reversal and stare decisis means that is highly unlikely. Frankly, I place better odds on getting it via a constitutional amendment. I like the idea, just a'int gonna happen.
And for those 60 years (me too) there pops up at least one a Congressional session about "allowing line item vetoes" which hasn't happened yet
It happened once, in 1996, and Clinton used it. In 1998, the Supremes ruled the Line Item Veto Act of 1996 to be unconstitutional. So these days, calls for line-item vetoes are just kabuki. And are likely to remain so unless one party can gain the House, gain two-thirds of the Senate, gain the Presidency, control at least five out of the nine Supremes, and suffer an outbreak of extreme stupidity (note that the Republicans currently meet 4 out of 5 of those conditions).
Sane politicians would realize that however desirable this may seem when their guy is President and facing a hostile congress, when the boot is on the other foot it's extremely undesirable. That hasn't stopped Senate leaders of both parties buggering up the system to gain short-term goals at the expense of shooting themselves in the foot later, so they may keep trying for line-item vetoes.
Fortunately, after the 1998 SCOTUS ruling, whenever a party feels the need for line-item vetoes it is unlikely to be in a position to get them, and whenever it is in a position to get them it doesn't feel the need (especially given how it may affect future elections by annoying people who value democracy). Unfortunately, the bastards currently in power are batshit insane, so all bets are off.
Since the Supreme Court declared it unconstitutional you'd need an amendment to make it happen, which implies it would have to be something both parties can agree on (since we will never - hopefully never - see either party control 2/3 of both the house and senate and vote as a unified block)
Be simpler to change Senate rules such that you can't have an "omnibus" budget that covers everything, but separate budgets for different parts of the government have to be passed separately, and can't contain any non-spending privileges.
Note however that sometimes those "non-spending privileges" can be good. One item inserted into the spending bill which apparently no one noticed until after it had passed was a provision that imposes additional sanctions on Russia. No way was Trump ever going to agree to doing anything his Russian master didn't want otherwise.
The whole Lobbyist and Congress critter crime spree, well it should be considered as such, is very reminiscent of French Royalty and their Courtiers before the revolution. As the right wing, both Republicans and Democrats, continue to press the US further into a Fascist state the closer the revolution comes, although it could take a couple of generations of real deprivation before equivalent outcome takes place.
The right wing pushes a fascist agenda?
Sorry which side wants to remove the constitution? Left.
Which side created "hate speech" Left.
Which side puts people in jail for jokes? Left.
Where has this all happened before? Marxist, communist and socialist countries.
How long before the left create the first western Gulag?
As much as I love NASA, there were things in there that should not have seen the light of day.
Senator Rand Paul posted a tweet of the bill printed out. A 2 foot tall 2,232 page stack. https://twitter.com/RandPaul/status/976836636779728896
That is just so many kinds of wrong.
2ft tall, oh the arbority(?)!
A while back there was an article about the UK govt requiring that laws be copied to velum. Now, if the laws of the US were hand-copied to velum before the vote, just think how legislation would change! "Sorry, but we're still working on the bills from last year..." "You need it when? Well, make it shorter!"
and about 1/8 of Jeff Bezos net worth.
What I do hope gets funded is the "Kilopower" (the reactor formerly known as KRUSTEE) range of reactors to power ion drives and do Mars (or Moon) surface power in globs of 10Kw each.
I wonder if line item veto could be something the Tea Party could get behind?
$595m to be spent on a mission to Europa, if that isn't the shameless waste of taxpayers' money? First, why would anyone want to go to Europe, it's full of socialists and they haven't even invented escalators and water closets yet. And then, if you really must, you can get a flight to Paris for under $100, and Paris is in the heart of Europe (there is nothing to see you can't already see in Las Vegas though).
The Reg is a shitstain on reporting. Donald Trump is standing between science and $20b?
Because to give NASA that $20b Trump has had to agree to a 2500+ page bill which has hundreds of billions of dollars given away.
See Rand Paul's tweets about this absolutely ludicrous bill and The Reg's inability to report anything Trump related with a straight bat.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019