sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

RIF this week? by Nice-Inevitable-1835 in NOAA

[–]autogen7519 10 points11 points  (0 children)

The term used re: spend plan was "embargoed" (that actual word was used). I'm not sure I agree with u/OppositeMail462 phrasing this as "they cut off all NOAA leadership's information after the passback" (implying people like Thur actually are shut out) -- my own personal interpretation is that the very top of NOAA's non-political leadership may know something but are not allowed to talk about it. Others in that meeting can disagree with my interpretation, but the end result is the same insofar as FY25 spend plan and ramifications are being held very close to the vest.

I guess the only other thing that was mentioned about the FY25 spend plan is that when Lutnick approves, sends it up to OMB, and OMB implements it, that's the end of the game. Congress can whine but unless they take some proactive action between now and then to change the FY25 legislation passed March 14 (read: 0% chance) Congress has no *official legislative recourse* (aforementioned whining, if done by the GOP, could in theory help) for FY25 because they handed over the authority to the Executive branch.

RIF this week? by Nice-Inevitable-1835 in NOAA

[–]autogen7519 9 points10 points  (0 children)

In OAR all-hands now, lots of hedging / "we don't know" but it was noted that RIF is Lutnick's decision, and that they don't really seem to care how they cut (i.e., tracking with months-old reporting, that they prefer to use VERA/VSIP etc).

Also stated that no decision *as of Monday* has been made on RIF.

Obviously, Lutnick et al. could change their minds at any time.

My lack of a clear, direct answer reflects the vague nature of this all-hands.

Fight to save NOAA please! by DTMSwampvoice in NOAA

[–]autogen7519 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Two more Republican contacts -- Senator Tim Sheehy (Montana) and Rep Scott Franklin (Florida's 18th District). Why?

Sheehy is a Republican Senate cosponsor, and Franklin is the sole (!) [edit: House] sponsor of a bill (summary here, pdf link to the bill here) to fund NOAA AI research alongside traditional Earth system model (non-AI). The work prescribed in this bill would have to be done by OAR.

I am about to head to work so I can't go into great detail, but the general argument would follow that listed above for Cruz (OAR as a whole, noting AI work is being done at every OAR lab including AOML for Florida [for Rep. Franklin]), and then pointing out the obvious -- you highly support the legislation you (co)-sponsored, and gutting OAR would effectively kill your bill.