Google Answers Logo
View Question
 
Q: NASA IS A WASTE! ( Answered,   2 Comments )
Question  
Subject: NASA IS A WASTE!
Category: Science > Astronomy
Asked by: yheggy-ga
List Price: $2.00
Posted: 25 Oct 2004 18:32 PDT
Expires: 24 Nov 2004 17:32 PST
Question ID: 420072
How much money does the USA give NASA per year?
Answer  
Subject: Re: NASA IS A WASTE!
Answered By: googlenut-ga on 25 Oct 2004 19:14 PDT
 
Hello yheggy-ga,

On September 21, 2004, the U.S. Senate Appropriations Committee
approved $16.379 billion in funding for NASA for fiscal year 2005. 
This is a $200 million increase over what NASA received for fiscal
year 2004.



U.S. Senate Committee on Appropriations
Press Release
September 21, 2004
http://appropriations.senate.gov/releases/record.cfm?id=226469
?National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA): is funded at
$16.379 billion, an increase of $200 million over the FY04 enacted
level, and a reduction of $665 million from the budget request. An
additional $800 million in emergency funding was added for NASA during
the Committee?s consideration of the bill.

-- The return to flight activities for the Shuttle program are funded
at $4.319 billion, the requested level from the Administration.

-- The International Space Station is funded at $1.6 billion. The bill
reduces ISS operations by $120 million due to the continued reduced
capability of the ISS for at least half of FY05.

-- The Moon/Mars vision: 

--- The Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) is funded at $268 million. 

--- A lunar exploration mission is funded at $20 million. 

--- $10 million is provided for Centennial Challenges. Neighborhood
Reinvestment Corporation (NRC): is funded at $115 million, the same as
FY04 and the budget request.?




Spacetoday.net 
Senate increases NASA funding
http://www.spacetoday.net/Summary/2564
?The Senate Appropriations Committee used a somewhat controversial
technique Tuesday to increase NASA's fiscal year 2005 budget by $200
million over what President Bush requested. The committee voted to
give NASA $16.4 billion in 2005, about $200 million more than what the
President requested and over $1 billion more than what House
appropriators approved in July.?




I hope you have found this information helpful.  If you have any
questions, please request clarification prior to rating the answer.

Googlenut




Google Search Terms:

nasa funding
://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=ISO-8859-1&q=nasa+funding
Comments  
Subject: Re: NASA IS A WASTE!
From: saem_aero-ga on 26 Oct 2004 18:11 PDT
 
Excellent answer googlenut.  Let me add some additional info.

You can get details about NASA spending here, from their own webpage. 

http://www.nasa.gov/about/budget/index.html

Also, from their own webpage, reasons why NASA is important, in a 5th grade format.

http://ksc.nasatechnology.com/resources/spinoffs/spinoffs.asp

I guess if you are someone not familiar with how NASA benefits our
society I can see how one might form the opinion of yheggy-ga.  Let me
put it this way - If you have watched TV recently, crossed a modern
bridge, flown in an airplane, recieved any form of modern medicine,
did any mathematics, drove a car, used a cellular phone, etc. then you
have somehow directly reaped the rewards which NASA has returned to
us.  Also NASA has a large outreach program for education, some people
believe this is important.

Best,
Steve.
Subject: Re: NASA IS A WASTE!
From: jaqamofino-ga on 26 Apr 2005 06:02 PDT
 
i believe that NASA is a HUGE waste of tax payers' money, but there
are so many huge wastes of tax payer monies, that i find it best not
to think about it.  i also think the National Endowment for the Arts
is a waste, but i guess i would rather see my money go to the NEA than
NASA.  of course, in a perfect world, tax payers' money would go
toward some sort of national healthcare program, and housing for the
homeless, but this is far from a perfect world.  in response to
Steve's comment:  do you really believe that spending trillions on
space exploration over the years was the ONLY way to invent the
cellfone?  and bridges???  i find that extremely hard to believe.  i
think it could have been done in a much more cost efficient way, right
here on bad-old-planet-earth.  just my two cents.  thanks for
listening.

Important Disclaimer: Answers and comments provided on Google Answers are general information, and are not intended to substitute for informed professional medical, psychiatric, psychological, tax, legal, investment, accounting, or other professional advice. Google does not endorse, and expressly disclaims liability for any product, manufacturer, distributor, service or service provider mentioned or any opinion expressed in answers or comments. Please read carefully the Google Answers Terms of Service.

If you feel that you have found inappropriate content, please let us know by emailing us at answers-support@google.com with the question ID listed above. Thank you.
Search Google Answers for
Google Answers  


Google Home - Answers FAQ - Terms of Service - Privacy Policy