Michael D. Griffin - Questions Concerning NASA Budget Management

Questions Concerning NASA Budget Management

Griffin has been criticized by space research organizations such as NASA Ames Research Center life sciences group for shifting portions of NASA's budget from science to manned spaceflight. Griffin had stated that he would not shift "one thin dime" of funding from science to human spaceflight, but less than six months later, in February 2006, after NASA Constellation funding did not reach requested levels, NASA revealed a budget that reduced space research funding by about 25%, including indefinite deferrals of planned programs such as the Jupiter Icy Moons Orbiter, the Terrestrial Planet Finder, and the Space Interferometry Mission. The logic was that funding Project Constellation, a presidentially mandated program, was the top priority of the space agency.

Funding for a New York company to research the Prometheus space nuclear program has also been put on hold, although Griffin has said he is anxious to pursue Prometheus after the earlier-priority development of the new spacecraft is completed. Earlier, in November 2005, funding for life science research conducted largely out of Ames Research Center was cut by 80%, prompting representatives of the Ames life sciences group to write a scathing letter to Griffin criticizing this cut.

The NASA field centers focused mainly on science rather than on human spaceflight, such as Ames and Glenn Research Center, have seen general budgetary downsizing, and many science contracts with outside researchers have been canceled. Griffin attributed these cuts, along with cuts in the human spaceflight budget, as being necessitated by a $3.2 billion shortfall. The National Research Council also concluded that NASA's total funding has not been enough to fulfill all its mandates and remain strong in science. However, during Administrator Griffin's term, science budgets were, as a percentage of NASA's total budget, inline with those during Project Apollo. There has been some discussion, after the release of the Summary Report by the Human Space Flight Committee that NASA has not been funded sufficiently to pursue a strong science program while continuing to focus on aeronautics and space exploration, the two key mission of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration.

Limitations on NASA's budget include a mandated continuation of the Space Shuttle program, including safety upgrades and testing; the mandated construction of the International Space Station; the mandated development of the Vision for Space Exploration architecture; programs outside of human spaceflight, consisting of science research and aeronautics research; and an ever-increasing share of NASA's budget devoted to line-item earmarks sometimes characterized as pork spending.