NASA Earth and Space Science Funded from 2008 to 2016 in Astrophysics, Planetary Science and Heliophysics Divisions

NASA’s space science portfolio – that include the Astrophysics, Planetary Science and Heliophysics Divisions – has had a flat joint budget for 8 years. The graph below shows the percentage modify in the space and Earth science workings of the Science Mission Directorate budget (using real-year dollars) since the previous year of the Bush Administration.There has been basically no growth for space science, not even charge up with very modest 1-2 percent inflation. 

 Meanwhile, since the nadir of the Astrophysic Division’s 22% budget cut, the combined Astrophysics and JWST budget has been considerably below its historical level of $1.4 billion a year – a level that is necessary for implementing the balanced program optional in the 2010 astronomy and astrophysics decadal survey.Both present and projected future budgets remain approximately $70 million a year (half of a Small Explorer mission) below that level for the predictable future. This the strange fate of one of the planet’s highest-performing science organization that in the new month will celebrate the 25th anniversary of the Hubble Space Telescope and the 2015 National Air & Space Museum Trophy being awarded to the Kepler mission.
My space science colleagues and I all recall vividly the move of roughly $3 billion of the Science budget’s future projected growth to searching in the 2006 time frame. This ignited a maelstrom of protests from the science community, which usually went unheeded for the balance of the Bush Administration. The data show that the space science budget has not recouped any of its resources from that time frame, and the declaration that the Science budget somehow owes the Exploration budget is farcical.
There is little question that NASA’s Science plan is a national treasure, consistently inspiring the nation with frontier discoveries, and not an suitable place to address putative funding shortfalls for an Exploration program that Rep. Palazzo has newly characterized as “plagued with instability from continually changing requirements, budgets, and missions.” Instead Rep. Palazzo should perhaps look at other areas of NASA with significant budgets that didn’t even exist six years ago to “recoup” study funds if he is not willing to bolster the in general NASA budget.