David Weldon: “I rise to speak about the NASA component in the budget. The NASA money is not specifically spelled out; but within the…”

“I rise to speak about the NASA component in the budget. The NASA money is not specifically spelled out; but within the overall context of science and technology, there is level funding in this budget. Aerospace products lead on our positive balance of payments. The investment that we have made for decades in aerospace technology is resulting in a tremendous amount of jobs and a positive balance of payments. In 2004 dollars, here is where NASA's budget was in 1991, and this is what happened during the previous administration. We actually saw a 30 percent decline in NASA's budget. What this current administration is proposing, and some people have been ridiculing the President's initiative, is to just try to get some slight growth out of NASA, recognizing the tremendous importance of this as well not only for our balance of payments but our national security. And I just want my colleagues to know in this House that if we reduce NASA below the President's budget request, it is going to come out of the shuttle returning to flight and getting the Space Station program back on track. This is not money to go to Mars. There was never money in this project to go to Mars.”