One, Big Beautiful Bill (The Mega-Bill)

67ae0ec43da1c.webp


684311277bb1e.webp
 
I listened to the talk show last night.

Hotel Mars June 4, 2025
John Batchelor, Dr. David Livingston


John and I welcomed Casey Dreier from The Planetary Society to the program to discuss the proposed NASA space and science budget cuts and the elimination of several key projects. Casey suggested that the direction for these cuts likely originated from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), with minimal input or guidance from the space policy experts.

He highlighted several affected programs, including significant budget reductions to the Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope, and the potential termination of the New Horizons and Venus missions. Casey also addressed the almost certain cancellation of the Space Launch System (SLS) and the Gateway program, both of which may die after Artemis 3.

We also talked about a potential shift toward commercial Moon missions, though Casey noted the plans were vague and lacked clear direction. Our discussion covered broader topics as well, including cislunar development, cargo and resupply missions to the ISS, the outlook for private space stations, Mars exploration, and entry, descent, and landing (EDL) demonstrations.

In Part 2 of the program, John focused on robotic missions—both current and planned—which are all heavily reliant on robotic technology. Casey added insights into the impact of budget cuts and restructuring at key NASA centers, including JPL and Goddard. Before concluding, we asked Casey about the implications of these changes for NASA scientists and engineers. He expressed concern about their uncertain job prospects, noting that opportunities for their highly specialized skills may be limited.

Here are 10 NASA missions that could be grounded under Trump’s 2026 budget

'What a waste:' US scientists decry Trump's 47% cuts to NASA science budget
By Monisha Ravisetti
"I don't think it is an overstatement to say that morale among U.S.-based scientists is at an all-time low."
 

Show me how this could pass congress and be implemented. If there is any possible way it could be passed I'm all for it.

Since I don't believe there is a way, spend and print seems like the way we keep the country afloat. My new take on it is does it really matter what the price of goods is if people can afford them? We can call it DGAF economics.
 
My new take on it is does it really matter what the price of goods is if people can afford them?

Who can afford them?

We're all being bled dry so food stamps can be extended to multinationals so they can still get workers at starvation wages (just another form of corporate welfare) and the system shoves us into Klaus Schwab's we'll own nothing and we'll supposedly be happy slavery, and you don't even have enough of a problem with it to let me speak up about it? If so, it makes me wonder if, one, you have kids, and two, if you love them.

6847f1eab649a.webp
 
Last edited:
Who can afford them?

We're all being bled dry so food stamps can be extended to multinationals so they can still get workers at starvation wages (just another form of corporate welfare) and the system shoves us into Klaus Schwab's we'll own nothing and we'll supposedly be happy slavery, and you don't even have enough of a problem with it to let me speak up about it? If so, it makes me wonder if, one, you have kids, and two, if you love them.

Have lots of kids and take the food stamps. Even if you don't believe in government welfare, take them anyway. It's better the money goes to Americans than illegals. There is a growing movement that believes this. Take everything the government offers. It was your money they took so get it back in any way possible.
 
We'll see if the bravado holds

'Take that bill down': GOP rep promises to tank Trump’s bill after Senate makes big change
On Monday, Punchbowl News co-founder Jake Sherman tweeted that the Senate's version of the bill repeals the $40,000 state and local tax (SALT) deduction that many Republicans insisted on, and reverts it back to the initial cap of $10,000. Should that $10,000 SALT cap remain in the final bill the Senate sends back to the House, Rep. Nick LaLota (R-N.Y.) promised to oppose it with several of his colleagues.

"Anything less than $40,000 will result in my no vote," LaLota said. "$39,999.99 would result in a no vote from me. I've been clear about my communications with my own leadership with the Senate over there. They can't water that down."

"That was a hard-fought negotiation that happened for four months. And $40,000 was the compromise number. It's not the starting point for where the Senate could then whittle it down," he continued. "$40,000 is the number that if they send it back a dollar less, we're gonna vote no on it and our five votes are gonna take that bill down."
 
Axed From Mega-Bill: Senate GOP’s plan to push food aid costs onto states
Senate Republicans’ plan to force states to share the cost of the country’s largest nutrition program to pay for their policy megabill has been halted by the chamber’s rules.

The Senate parliamentarian determined that the cost-sharing plan would violate the so-called Byrd Rule, which limits what can be included in the reconciliation process, and would be subject to a 60-vote filibuster threshold, according to an advisory sent out Friday night by Senate Budget Committee Democrats.

That means Republicans will need to head back to the drawing board after months of heated debate about how to slash spending on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program.
...
The cost-sharing plan, which was first put forward by House Republicans, sparked backlash from state officials and concerns within the caucus. The bill would make states pay for SNAP benefits for the first time using a sliding scale based on their payment error rates.

The Senate Agriculture Committee introduced a scaled-back version of the House GOP’s cost-sharing plan earlier this month. Without it, Senate Republicans will struggle to find enough cuts to pay for their policy priorities and the $67 billion farm bill package they included — all with an ambitious timeline of delivering the megabill to President Donald Trump’s desk by July 4.
 
House GOP moderates tell leadership they won’t back Senate tax bill over Medicaid cuts
More than a dozen House Republicans warned they won’t support the Senate’s version of the tax and spending bill because the proposed Medicaid cuts are too steep.

Led by Rep. David Valadao (R-Calif.), 15 other vulnerable Republicans sent a letter to Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) and House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) saying they support the Medicaid reforms in the House version of the legislation, but the Senate Finance Committee proposal went too far.

“Protecting Medicaid is essential for the vulnerable constituents we were elected to represent. Therefore, we cannot support a final bill that threatens access to coverage or jeopardizes the stability of our hospitals and providers,” the lawmakers wrote. “The House’s approach reflects a more pragmatic and compassionate standard, and we urge that it be retained in the final bill.”
 
We must be getting close to running out of emergency measures to fund the government. We should be hearing stuff about the debt limit pretty soon.
 
Back
Top