Funding NASA With $37 Billion Over Two Years: Liftoff? (H.R. 2039)

What is H.R. 2039?

(Updated February 3, 2017)

This bill outlines the National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s (NASA) budget for 2016-2017, providing $18.5 billion in funding for fiscal year 2016 and $18.8 billion in 2017. It would increase use of the International Space Station for science research, encourage the commercial use of space, further develop protection from solar flares, remove space debris, and support development of a new space telescope that would aid in detecting Earth-sized planets. Funding would also be provided for Science, Technology, Engineering and Math (STEM) education.

In addition, NASA would report to Congress more frequently and work with organizations like the National Academy of Public Administration (NAPA) and the National Academies to review NASA’s effectiveness.

The bill also alters the budgets of existing divisions within NASA. Specifically, it:

• Significantly decreases funding for NASA’s Earth Science Division;

• Decreases funding for NASA’s Heliophysics Division;

• Significantly increases funding for NASA’s Planetary Science Division, which experienced a series of large funding cuts in 2013;

• Increases funding for NASA’s Astrophysics Division.

Argument in favor

This bill doesn’t promise NASA more money than the government can afford and increases funding for NASA’s Planetary Science Division.

Argument opposed

The bill forces a change in NASA review schedules and cuts funding for NASA’s Earth Science Division, which is an important part of NASA.

Impact

NASA and its employees; private sector space companies; people receiving the funding for STEM education included in the bill; NAPA; the National Academies; Congress.

Cost of H.R. 2039

The CBO estimates that implementing H.R. 2039 would cost $37.1 billion over the 2016-2020 period.

Additional Info

In-Depth: In his statement supporting the bill, sponsoring Rep. Steven Palazzo (R-MS) argued that the bill doesn’t give NASA more money than the government can afford: “Unlike the president’s budget request, this bill fully complies with the Budget Control Act (BCA) and provides for increased authorizations in the event that the BCA is repealed, replaced, or amended; or if off-sets are identified within existing discretionary spending accounts to allow for increases.”

The Planetary Society, a non-profit advocacy group, wrote in a press release that it didn’t support the bill due to cuts in NASA’s Planetary Science Division:

“Understanding the forces acting on Earth’s environment as well as the impacts of climate change are important, and only NASA possesses the skills and expertise to build the scientific spacecraft required to conduct this research.”

Of Note: A report from the Space Foundation compares the NASA budget proposals of the President, the committee which approved the bill, and the previous year’s budget. It shows that the President’s requested budget for NASA was higher than the 2015 NASA budget and gave NASA’s Earth Science Division $500 million more than the committee. The committee proposed decreasing NASA’s overall budget.

Additionally, an article from Space Policy Online highlights how the bill that was approved by the committee was divided along party lines, with Republicans supporting the bill and Democrats opposing the bill because of the changes it made in funding allocation for the Earth Science Division.

Media:

• Sponsoring Rep. Steven Palazzo (R-MS) Press Release
• CBO Cost Estimate
• Planetary Society
• Space Policy Online
• Space Foundation