A broad swath
The world according to Trump – science and scientific research should Just Go Away so that we can spend more and more and more billions on guns and subs and planes.
The Trump administration wants to eliminate a broad swath of the nation’s climate change research infrastructure, including satellites, education programs and science centers.
Though it has little chance of being enacted, the Trump administration’s budget proposal unveiled yesterday targets hundreds of millions of dollars in climate science, renewable energy research and climate mitigation efforts across a variety of federal agencies, including NASA, NOAA, U.S. EPA and the departments of the Interior and Energy.
Because why try to slow and mitigate the effects of climate change? Why not just party hard now and let the next generations deal with the result?
Once again, the administration has proposed eliminating a number of climate-related satellite programs, including the functions of some already in orbit. The total savings would be $133 million for the five missions, including the Plankton, Aerosol, Cloud, Ocean Ecosystem (PACE) mission, which is scheduled for a 2022 launch. As with most satellites, PACE has multiple functions and can be used to forecast harmful algal blooms, which have plagued the Great Lakes in recent years. Trump’s proposal would also eliminate the Earth-observing abilities of the Deep Space Climate Observatory, which was proposed by then-Vice President Al Gore and also measures solar storms.
Or he could just take fewer trips to Mar-a-Lago at a cost of millions.
At NOAA, the budget would be trimmed 20 percent, by about $1 billion, to $4.6 billion in 2019. The White House called for the elimination of $273 million in grants, something that congressional appropriators have also rejected. Those include the National Sea Grant College Program, the National Estuarine Research Reserve System, coastal zone management grants, the Office of Education and the Pacific Coastal Salmon Recovery Fund.
Who needs salmon? Who cares if salmon recover or not? Salmon should get up off its ass and get a job.
The Interior Department’s chief science agency would take a major hit under the proposed budget. The U.S. Geological Survey is the lead federal agency in providing science and mapping on ecosystems, energy and mineral resources, water use and natural hazards like earthquakes and volcanoes. It would receive just under $860 million, about a 20 percent decrease from funding levels enacted for fiscal 2017. The White House’s proposal is $62 million less than it asked for last year to fund USGS (see related story).
Who needs to know any of that stuff? Just send out an intern or something.
The budget request includes $13 million to fund only three of the eight regional climate science centers and one national climate adaptation science center—the others would presumably close. That is $4.4 million less than the administration allocated in its fiscal 2018 budget proposal and less than half of what Congress enacted for fiscal 2017. Established by Congress in 2008, the climate science centers develop science and tools to help land managers address climate change-related impacts to land, water, fish and wildlife, and cultural sites.
Who cares what happens to land, water, fish and wildlife, and cultural sites? They’re not gold-plated, you can’t have sex with them, they don’t MAGA. Fuck’em.
Trump’s budget proposal would also slash funding for EPA’s Office of Science and Technology to $449 million, down from $714 million in fiscal 2017 enacted levels. The number of full-time-equivalent staff positions would also fall to 1,481 in fiscal 2019 from 2,124 under fiscal 2017 enacted levels.
Because we don’t need to protect the environment. We need to protect stockholders and donaldtrumps.
Congressional Democrats widely panned the administration’s spending plan.
Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson (D-Texas), ranking member of the House Science, Space and Technology Committee, said the plan shows that the Trump administration has no appreciation for the role that research at federal agencies plays in driving the economy or protecting the environment and public health.
Well that’s because his skill is conning people into paying him $$$ for slapping his name on their buildings, aka “branding.” You can’t expect him to interrupt that highly skilled work by paying attention to the role that research at federal agencies plays in driving the economy or protecting the environment and public health.
Trump doesn’t understand science, therefore science must be (1) irrelevant and (2) evil. Evil because it is hiding its agenda behind sciency language that we all know is a made-up language, one made-up by anti-Trump anti-Americans like Al Gore. And probably some of it was made up by nasty women, and we can’t have that.
But here is one special study he is funding:
Perhaps some clever scientist could slip in funding for a project to send POSOTUS to Mars a-largo*
* i.e. in the musical sense: slowly
POSOTUS. I like it.
I would suggest Venus rather than Mars. The Martian atmosphere is just too thin. Too cold there, too.Trump’s plans and prioroties would help push Earth towards Venusian conditions. If we send him there now, he won’t have to wait decades to experience balmy weather that can melt a saucepan. Think of all the savings not needing that spray-on tan anymore.
Can’t we pick a planet further away? Say, Neptune? It’s the windiest planet, so he could have a wind-bag competition with the planet itself.
@Iknklast – that’s still too close for me. How about SWEEPS-11? 22,000 light-years might be far enough for comfort.
I mean, ideally I’d prefer a planet in another galaxy, but our exoplanet detection apparatus isn’t quite up to that task yet. ;-)
There’s always The Restaurant at the End of the Universe. Would that be far enough?
I’m probably weird, but I take some consolation in the fact that the rest of the universe is still uncontaminated by the orange sewage fountain as well as human stupidity and evil in general. This may in fact be the only non-depressing fact that’s left.
When talking budget, the Dems should simply ask Trump one question: Do you like to golf? You do? Fund science then. No science, no golf.