The main sign that WHCD is going to suck ass this year is that Trump is not afraid to attend it.

BTW, this is one of the currently active, functioning, doing-good-science missions that the proposed budget would kill.

House Committee on Science, Space and Technology The House Committee on Science, Space and Technology

Also troubling: NASA reportedly implemented some of the cuts in the (later rejected) budget request from last year, without waiting for them to be approved. If govt keeps threatening cuts, the agency will not be able to function as though the budget is stable. Even if reversed, these cuts hurt.

A similar budget cut was proposed last year, and in January, Congress soundly rejected it. NASA, including the science it does, generally has good bipartisan support, and it's often possible to claw back the budget. But it's deeply concerning that the admin is pushing the same thing again, so soon.

On cutting STEM Engagement, admin says:
“NASA will inspire the next generation of explorers through exciting, ambitious space missions, not through subsidizing woke STEM programming and research that prioritizes some groups of students over others and has had minimal impact on the student outcomes.”

There's a detailed breakdown of the science cuts in the budget request here: aas.org/posts/news/2...

Note that the budget also proposes the total elimination of the Office of STEM Engagement. If this goes through, then whatever little science we still pay for, NASA won't be able to tell us about.

84 NASA missions at risk under new proposal Proposed NASA cuts would reduce NASA’s workforce by thousands and cancel over 50 space missions.

It's estimated that these extreme cuts to NASA science would cancel more than 40 missions. That's lost science, lost discovery, lost innovation, and the end of careers. Some of these missions are already in space, doing good science, and would simply be abandoned. www.planetary.org/articles/82-...

Your Guide to NASA's Budget How big is NASA's budget right now? What was it like in the past? How does it compare to the rest of government spending? These answers, as well as…

While we're talking percentages, let's talk about the proposed cuts to NASA's science budget.

NASA is currently 0.36% of US federal spending. www.planetary.org/space-policy...

The proposed budget cuts NASA science by 47%.

NASA science is already on a shoestring, and that string is about to break

And just to be abundantly clear:

NASA AND SCIENCE IN GENERAL HAVE MASSIVE RETURN ON INVESTMENT.

Cutting this budget is a net financial LOSS in the medium- to long-term. It undermines our future -- intellectually, technologically, and economically.

the other reason it has to be done immediately is that it’s the biggest political lift of the bunch

expanding the court is simply Not Done, it hasn’t been seriously discussed since FDR, it’s going to need every last bit of “we just swept these fuckers out of power” cred you have

it cannot wait

the reform agenda necessary to even try to begin undoing the damage we are currently suffering will not be doable under the current Supreme Court

it is the linchpin upon which everything else rests, and without addressing it the next admin will be a failure

there are going to be people who say, take a wait and see approach to how the Court will treat the next Dem president

and those people are wrong, we know exactly how they will treat that person and it is the polar opposite of how they treat Trump

strike at them immediately, first order of business

Star-Ledger shutting down its DC bureau was such a blow

watching jared isaacman testify before congress about the budget rn and why is everyone in congress an actively asleep old person?

if you are "sick" — which, again for RFK is a function of race, class and perceived purity — then there is nothing you can do in the face of disease and death, you are destined to succumb. the upshot either way is we do not need vaccines or most modern medical interventions.

the way this makes sense for RFK is that "healthy people" and "sick people" are ontological categories.

Judge bars certification of Virginia redistricting results; state AG promises appeal | CNN Politics A congressional map approved by Virginia voters that aims to help Democrats net four US House seats in November’s midterms faces another legal hurdle just one day after its passage. Tazewell County Ci...

Trump isn't leaving peacefully or legally.

All the signs are there.

Here's another.

www.cnn.com/2026/04/22/p...

I bet he would not be saying this if it were human spaceflight on the chopping block instead of science.

Christ this is bleak. NASA already operates on a shoestring and for decades that string has gotten thinner and thinner. There are no more “efficiencies” to be had — take anything more away and things just start breaking.

living with the reality of the challenges we face at present is exhausting on the mind; indeed i understand why maskless denial is so alluring. but many hands make light work, and many masks get us just that much closer to not only our present, but the future we must build together.

it gives me no pleasure to say this—i don’t find masking as much as i must to be particularly thrilling—but our reality is stark. you cannot Act As If covid is gone and then be shocked when a nefarious actor makes the same claim. why wouldn’t they? your complacency has allowed it.

if you find yourself appalled that RFK Jr is able to make this claim but you don’t wear a mask in, at the very least, public indoor spaces, you are acting in precisely the way that allows him to say that covid is gone.

Most Americans: I’m going to die working this job 😞

Members of Congress: I’m going to die working this job! 😃

Dudes rock

When I was working on curiosity, our budget decreased by 5-10% every year, our power output from the RTG decreased by about the same, and we managed to do just as much science over time—sometimes even more—than when the mission started.

A 50% cut out of nowhere would kill missions like curiosity.

As a reminder, NASA's entire budget, *including* human spaceflight (which is about half of it), is already less than 0.4% of US federal spending. As a comparison, defense spending, even when NOT actively starting wars, is more than 10% (with a huge increase proposed for FY2027).

If there are inefficiencies in NASA science spending (and I don't doubt there are!) then addressing those WITHOUT reducing the budget would mean more science, more innovation, more return on investment, more benefit to humanity. But realistically, cutting science funding by half just cuts science.

A number of space science organizations offered support for Isaacman's nomination because he is a proponent of space exploration and claimed he would support science. But now that science is on the chopping block -- and human spaceflight isn't -- he is volunteering to give NASA the DOGE treatment.

three of these people (Turner, Grijalva, and Connoly) ran for office with cancer diagnoses!

if your name is not Marcy Kaptur and you are a House Democrat over 80 it is a governing imperative you lose your primary