tv White House Defends Presidents Tweets CSPAN June 29, 2017 7:12pm-8:01pm EDT
rather distracted with politics to the point where they owed henry back wages. in 1860 his employer decided to give the paper to henry. so he became owner of the newspaper and turned it into a success invested in a lot of real state as the town grew and was able to build a house. >> watch the city tour of portland, oregon saturday at noon eastern on c-span twos book tv and a 2:00 p.m. on american history tv on c-span three. >> treasury secretary announced she sanctions against the chinese bank for its involvement with north korea. he stressed that sanctions were not aimed at china and that the two countries continue to work together to solve the north korean nuclear issue.
sarah sanders took additional questions. mostly focused on the president's tweets about msnbc morning joe host. >> good afternoon. i would like to have a treasury secretary, steve nomination up to speak first and take a few questions regarding the recent announcement on sanctions. as always i will be back after to answer your questions. >> thank you today, the trump administration is continuing efforts against the government of north korea. despite multiple un security council resolutions imposing international sanctions, the government of north korea continues its nuclear and ballistic missile programs.
today, treasury's financial crimes enforcement network has found the bank of dan don't to be a foreign national institution a primary laundering concern under section 311 of the usa patriot act. this bank has served as a gateway for north korea to access the u.s. and international financial systems. facilitating millions of dollars of transactions for companies involved in north korea's nuclear and ballistic missile programs. the united states will not stand for such action. this will require u.s. banks to ensure the bank of -- does not access the u.s. financial system directly or indirectly through other foreign banks. the section reaffirms the treasury department's commitment to ensure that north korea is
cut off from the u.s. financial system. in addition, the department of treasury's office of foreign control has sanctioned two individuals in one entity for their continued support of north korea's activities. while today's actions are directed at chinese individuals and entities, we work for to continue to work closely with the governments of china to stop illicit financing involving north korea. we are in no way targeting china with these actions. will be meeting with china and other countries at the g20's week to further our efforts to cut off north korea's illicit activities. north korea's provocative, destabilizing and inhumane behavior will not be tolerated. we are committed to targeting north korea's external enablers and maximizing economic pressure
on the regime until it ceases its nuclear and ballistic missile programs. without i'm happy to answer questions. >> congress going to introduce the north korea travel ban, do -- >> have no comments on it today. i will say that will continue to look at a range of options as we are very serious about them stopping their activity. >> can you quantify the financial activity that you are trying to stop today and access direct and indirect at the u.s. financial market? >> this is very significant, this is the first bank we have cut off under this. that will continue to work at
these actions and rollout sanctions. in this case it's millions of dollars but we are committed to cutting off all illegal funds going to north korea. >> when we put sanctions. >> this bank will not be able to access the u.s. financial system either directly or indirectly. it's a very significant action. >> he may clear this is not punishment against china. obviously the white house -- are you satisfied that china will see it that way and with what china is doing currently with north korea? president trump and president she have had very productive conversations about north korea and we appreciate their work and hope they will continue to work with us. notwithstanding that, we're taking these actions to show the seriousness in which we will
deal with this. >> can you talk more about the link between specific bank and government and north korea? were trying to get a better question. >> i'm not going to go into the specifics of the but it does involve certain intelligence. we have very specific intelligence and again, we'll follow the money and cut off the money. >> i know you did the research, the actual economic impact that it had on the north koreans and how that economic impact negatively may cause them a change in their position. >> as you know the sanctions were very effective in iran and that is what brought iran to the table. we will continue to work with our allies and speak to people at the g20. we are firmly committed to work with other nations to cut off illicit financing.
>> are you trying to give a heads up in any way about the action you're announcing today and you use the term in your statement, does china have enabler and north korea? >> i'm not going to comment specifically, obviously we've had very productive conversations with them. as i said this is not directed at china, is directed at a bank as well as individuals and entities in china. whether in china or anyone else we will continue sanctions. >> could north korea moved their assets from this bank to another bank in china? >> if we find other activities will sanction other entities, nobody is off-limits. >> last week the president tweet about we greatly appreciate the efforts of president she has he given up. >> we will continue to work with
china and everyone else. the president is committed that will cut the money off to north korea until they behave properly. >> how much do you think china has moved the needle on north korea? as far as tax reform to say there's roughly -- dealing with that issue are there any contingency plans in place in case of healthcare doesn't get done and how much of the administration of a seriously considering? >> that's a lot of questions. when we work backwards. no decisions have been made. gary and i will sometime make recommendations to the president but no decisions have been made on that. for tax reform, we are very committed to get tax reforms on the sheer.
it's one of the president's top priorities for economic growth. i think the people of america understand that, that we need economic growth and were committed to that. i expect healthcare will get done. regardless, work committed to get a tax reform done. >> let me follow up with you on tax reform if you don't mind. paul ryan -- why should the american people believe that things are on track when we see the things with healthcare. >> why shouldn't the american people believe it? of course they should believe it. chairman hatch has said it, paul ryan has said it. >> he received a letter for lawmakers my question to you is,
have you reconsidered that idea? do you believe that ideas on the table my understanding the debt ceiling is in october. does that give congress additional time in your mind or would you still like them to act? >> i haven't given specifics in regard to the dropdead day. i said i hope congress acts before they leave. yet we do have contingency plans if they don't. so the market should not be concerned. again, for the benefit of everybody, the sooner they do it the better for your. as it relates to banks we will continue to take very significant action rolling out additional sanctions on north korea until they stop their behavior. >> one question on indirect access to the bank, are you aware of other banks providing similar access and one other
bank? >> we have a team of people both in treasury and working with the intelligence agencies. as we see other banks this is something we take very seriously will be talking to this at the g20 is a priority i was. >> is this really an indication of how limited the options are in terms of dealing with north korea directly? >> i cannot fan anyway it's limited and our options are quite the contrary. we are committed and will work with everybody and nothing is off the table. where we see illicit financing we will stop it.
there is no message before the g20, so in no way this is a message aimed at china. >> i specifically said this was not aimed at china this is about north korea and about how serious were taking this, and whether it's china or anybody else we will take this serious seriously. >> the president is committed to cut the money off to until they behave properly. how are you defining success? >> i think you'll know success when you see it.
>> i think everybody will know success, their behavior is unacceptable and it will be very clear, we want them to stop doing tests with the ballistic missile programs and others. it's very clear a lot of things that people don't understand your uniquely qualified to explain, the administrators are say there will be $321 billion in savings from the health care bill out there. wouldn't tha isn't that because benefits are being taken away, isn't this a take away? >> not at all. one of the falls of the scoring on the cbo when you look at the number of people is that again, there's a lot of people when given the option will decide not to elect to take the health care because it's a bad deal. does me people are losing healthcare it was a giant tax hike on the economy.
it's a another reason why we continue to have sub growth at the last for years and this administration is a hundred% focused on creating economic growth, creating jobs, creating proper wages same getting the economy back to 3% or higher. >> have a couple of finance questions. the push came to show of would you advise for prioritizing debt payments or not? do you believe the chinese investments -- let me just make my, i take this very seriously and i can tell you the reviews are very involved in about who is on the other side is very important for national security in regards to prioritization i
believe we should pay our debts on time to questions, you are a participant with madame -- at the last meeting and he certainly know there is some concern about what the future u.s. policy is. what is the u.s. policy toward that end toward involvement in financial relief in the euros on? >> i've had the pleasure of meeting with christine at least a dozen times. i think the imf plays an important role in looking at currency and the imf was very helpful in regards to stabilizing the grease situation and working with europe.
think that could've been a major problem the summer that would've had significant concerns to the markets and the economy. they she was an important part of the negotiations. >> the second question was how do you feel about maintaining and specifically for the release of degrees,. >> let me just, the imf commitment to greece was quite small. not even sure that greece would necessarily use that. the significance was more of a stamp of approval. no direct cost to the u.s. or the taxpayer we are supportive of the imf and we will look at our contributions to the imf like we look at all contributions very carefully make sure were spending the taxpayers money properly.
>> verify which entities are being sanctioned. the paperwork that opec sent out also includes -- shipping and two chinese individuals and does not mention the bank, is it for total entities? >> there's two different actions. there's a -- anxious against the bank and then there are the three oh fax sanctions as you pointed out. >> again, i'm not making any comments on the behind the scenes on how we can communica communicate. >> your mathematical man, what are the chances that we get fort 15% corporate tax rate or 25% corporate tax rate in the final bill? >> tax reform is a pastoral exercise. were going to get this passed for a plan that's good for the american public. we are working closely with the
house and senate. will get a bill that's great for the economy and americans and put people back to work. >> will healthcare lead to lower premiums and standard coverage. >> again, i'm here primarily to talk about sanctions and tax reform. i will, to get on healthcare, although not my primary area. the healthcare that has been in place is a bad deal for the american public, that's why a lot of people are not using it, it was a giant tax hike to the american economy and premiums have been going up a ton. we are looking at making the system more competitive to people can actually afford it.
>> the airports all over the world have to step up aviation security because there's this threat commits a product of a months long discussion that resulted -- i wondering if you, this is a security risk, are you satisfied the security risk or the economic risk. for example certain airlines or certain airports are cut off if they don't comply. >> let me say that i can think of nobody better than general kelly to protect our country in this position. again, i've had the opportunity to discuss issues with him at the national sku to counsel. not going to comment specifically but let me make it clear. the safety of the american public is our utmost concern. we will never, ever put economic issues where we risk the lives of the american public. >> on tax reform, how are you going to be neutral and is the
cbo say that you don't get the growth or revenue what are you going to do? >> let me just for say there'll be complete transparency when we come out with the plan. were in the process of listening sessions. we met with hundreds of ceos, think tanks, various groups and i was over at the house twice today talking to people at the house of representatives. we have been at the senate, we are listening. as we develop the penalty and we will have a responsible plant that is paid for. we believe in dynamic scoring it will take that into account. >> the gdp for the first quarter came out today during the campaign the president repeatedly promised growth rates between three and 4%.
first, how much of that 1.4% is attributable to the action of this demonstration or inaction? secondly, when are we going to see three to 4% growth rate the president promised? >> i think i've been clear about what the projections are for growth and we believe we can get to 3% or higher gdp. we been clear it is not this year or next year, it will take some time to scaling. our projection over the ten-year time is 2.9% which is quite conservative. scaling up to three and staying there which i think about the president and i believe we can do better than 3%. our projections in the budget are conservatives. to the extent we can get healthcare past and tax reform passed and rollback regulatory issues in both financial and energy and other areas were very comfortable we will hit the growth projections. i will take two more questions than i will turn it over to the superstar over here.
>> the president said before that if china is not going to help with north korea problems the u.s. will, he is make clear that he does not think china is currently doing enough, where does he stand on the u.s. taken unilateral actions and if there's deadlines like t20 or deadlines for which the u.s. -- >> i think the president has made it very clear that if there are deadlines he is not going to advertise those deadlines. i'm not going to make any specific comments as to if he has a deadline or if he has a deadline when it is. that will make no sense. i assure you we will have conversations with her g20 counterparts about this next week. we been having these conversations and will continue to do more. one more question.
>> it doesn't appear that the house and senate will look past sanctions related to russia and i think we've got a straight answer as to whether the president supports the does the present support that? >> not only the sanctions on north korea today, we have sanctions on iran already, we will continue to put more sanctions on iran around their ballistic missile and other programs. we have you sanctions and other areas so we will continue to use these. notwithstanding anything congress passes i assure you this administration and the treasury department will use sanctions to the maximum amount available by law. we don't need congress to put on more, will do more whether they tell us are not. >> thank you everyone, it's a
pleasure to be here. >> thank you mr. secretary. at the top of yesterday's briefing you heard from tom homan and john uber about how important the two immigration bills the house will be voting on today are in the efforts to secure the border and protect our communities. this morning secretary kelly spoke about the law important legislation that is supported by 80% of americans. yesterday the president heard the tragic stories of the innocent american lives there were ended by a violent individual who should have never been allowed inter country or community. a star high school athlete from los angeles was killed by a member of the 18th street gang while her mother was serving her second duty in iraq and a
classmate. christie, fortino girl who was raped and murdered by a man who had multiple warrants out for other crimes involving kidnapping and rape. twenty-five years later he was located in native mexico where he fled after murdering christie in 1990. the president heard from federal immigration officials local sheriffs on the front lines to protect innocent american lives. slow will help empower the federal government the partnership with local authorities to more easily locate and remove the violent individuals and prevent sanctuary cities from receiving benefits from the very agency whose rules they are refreezing to enforce. the president looks were dissing these, since proposals pass in the house today so we can be one step closer to helping fulfill the campaign promise to help stop the horrific crimes.
yesterday we're disappointed to see that people living in 14 out of nevada's 18 counties will be left without a single choice in the state obama care exchanges. specifically setting difficulties on a shrinking market. to add insult to injury, thousands of people living in nevada without access to health insurance on the exchanges will be taxed for not having insurance that is even available to them. this is another reminder that obama care is collapsing. leaving millions of people around the country suffering the consequences of this film law. the vice president is on the hill this afternoon for one-on-one meetings on healthcare this work continues towards repealing and replacing obama care. were keeping these american families, business owners and individuals at the front of our minds. they've been paying ever-increasing premiums and still losing their plans and doctors. it's time to fulfill the promise
to the american people and come together around a consensus plan to fix the broken system. in terms of the schedule for today, the president make will speech on the importance of american energy dominance at the department of energy. the united states has been reliant on other countries for energy for decades. with new innovations and advances we have had the opportunity not only to become energy independent but to serve resources as an important tool in advancing global interests. i let the president get into details on how we do that later this afternoon. hopefully you will turn in. there's been a few questions asked that sean and i both said we would get back to him. all direct a couple of those now. they asked how we news the supreme court's ruling was 9 - 0 when the decision was announced. the decision was stated the lower court's injunction on the executive order for all effective individuals without a
person or entity in the united states was unanimous on the point that it should grant at least to that extent. three justices would've gone further to say the injunction in in. no justice indicated that he or she did not participate in the decision. jennifer jacobs asked about the projection about u.s. growth. the commerce department revised first quarter gdp upward the both the imf figures show that we have more work to do. the president has spoken clearly about faster more sustainable economic growth to create jobs and raise incomes for americans. the mfs of express support including more infrastructure spending, reforming the tax code, boosting educational outcomes and adopting family-friendly policies. they're working to end job
killing negotiations. lastly, they asked what deal breakers exist in senate negotiations on healthcare bill. the president is not going to negotiate in public. he's laid out his parties to repeal and replace obama care with a system with greater prices and choices at lower costs. obama care is failing a new policy is around the corner. from ongoing negotiation were confident that any amendment agree to will make the bill stronger. the other one is gaining support is the bernie sanders single-payer plan which will cost trillions of dollars over the next few decades. a few democrats have signed onto this approach. the president believes it is completely unaffordable and creates a one-size-fits-all government approach to healthcare. that bill and others like it on the other side have been proposed are clearly deal
breakers. i be happy to take if you know in reference to the president's tweets this morning is but a matter of some discussion today at fox news that the president has a right to defend himself when he's attacked i no secret that this program has been very critical of him. however the nature of the tweets this morning has john compton nation on capitol hill including speaker of the house, senator graham and susan collins are all allies of the president. to the president go too far with his tweet? >> i don't think so. i think the president has been attacked mercilessly on personal accounts by members on the program. i think it's been very clear that when he gets attacked he will hit back. the american people elected someone who is tough, smart and a fighter. that's donald trump. i don't think it's a surprise to anybody that he fights fire with
fire. the things the shows called him and not just him but numerous members of his staff including myself and many others i very deeply personal. to then turn and pretend like this approach i guess is like were living in the twilight zone, they do it day after day and then the president response and defense himself and everybody is u appalled and blon away. frankly if this has happened in the previous administration the type of attacks launched on this program and the things they say, utterly stupid, mentally ill, constant personal attacks : multiple members flyers to their faces mother sitting on the program. the rest of the media would said hold on. but nobody does that. the president is not going to step back.
>> a couple of the criticisms from supporters of the president and said this particular tweet was beneath the dignity of the office. where does the president try that line on the dignity of the office? >> i think he shows that every day in the decision he's making the priorities he's laid out in his agenda. he will not sit back and be attacked by the liberal media and when they hit him he will hit back. >> have a healthcare question but one other aspect of this someone suggested in their tweet that the president misconstrued one of the messages that should have been gathered from shooting that involve steve scalise and others. the hostility of that environment can create an environment of hostility.
to have any reaction to that sentiment that conversations like this create an atmosphere that is either dangerous or when we need to avoid. >> the president and no way former fashion has ever promoted or encouraged violence of anything, quite the contrary. he was simply pushing back and defending himself. >> c talked about the president's overall priority, late last night as far as the amendment, $45 million was put on the table for opiate treatment and health savings account could be used according to this draft. why did he believe that would make the bill better, specifically did he believe that the allocation would be sufficient?
. . he said our country row perhaps become closer, more unified. this is tweaked this morning helped to unify the country? >> again kristin i think i -- this question has been asked and i've answered several times. >> does it help unify the country? >> again i think that the president is pushing back against people who attack him
day after day after day. where is the outrage on back? you guys are constantly coming in asking is this okay? it day after day after day. the only person i see a war on is this president and everybody that works for him. >> i have a follow-up on that one i understand your point but he is president of the united states so he has to stand a higher standard and you talk about criticism he said president obama wasn't born in this country so he's up clearly part of the criticizing. so i wonder how you make that argument. >> again i think i've been. clear that when the president gets hit he's going to hit back harder which is what he did here today. >> he has to meet a higher standard on cable news. >> look i don't think you can expect some to be personally
attacked after day minute by minute and setback. the american people elected a fighter. they didn't elect somebody to sit back and do nothing. they knew what they were getting when they voted for donald trump anyone overwhelmingly. c sarah how is insulting a woman on twitter being a fighter? >> there was an naras poll that said 60% of registered voters said a president tweets are reckless and distracting but only 22% say that their effective and informative and republicans on this question are split down the middle half of the republicans saying they are reckless and distracting. so how can you argue that this is something the president must do? >> i answer this question yesterday in regards to the poll. i think anytime the president has a chance to speak directly to the american people it's a good thing. >> sarah as a woman how do you feel about the president attacking another specifically for her looks? and what is that show is an
example to how men should be treating other women? >> look everybody wants to make this about an attack on a woman and what about the constant attacks that he receives for the rest of us. i've been attacked multiple times that i don't cry foul because they. want to create this false narrative, one-handed like treat everybody equally and on the other hand they attack, attack attack and he responded apparently that's wrong. i'm sorry guys i've answered this question. >> he's the president sarah. >> why can't he take the heat? >> i just want to talk about being personally affected by all of this as well and nothing is wrong with the president fighting fire with fire if they are committee are making so i would ask you on a personal level. you have stood here and talked about your family from this podium. are you going to tell your kids this behavior is okay?
>> i've been asked before when it comes to role models as a person of faith i think we all have one perfect role model and when i'm asked the question i point to god, i point to my faith and that's where i tell my kids to look. none of us are perfect and certainly there's only one that is and that's where i would point that direction. >> i want to ask you my follow-up question, a follow-up question just one more policy points with the g20 coming up next week. i want to ask about the president meeting with putin that's coming up and gary cohen and h.r. mcmaster and it definitive answer from you on whether the person will bring up election interference. if the president going to press putin on that? >> obviously i'm not going to get out of the president's conversation. as we typically do i would imagine we will have a readout after that conversation takes place. >> john. >> i'll come to you next.
>> the president's tweet's today doesn't help his legislative agenda? does that help them win the votes of the nine senators who have come out against that senate bill senator colin senator murkowski for instance? what is your view on that? >> again i think were just looking for new ways to rephrase this question. the president was attacked and he responded. there's nothing more i have to add a nap. >> but as it relates to his legislative agenda and not asking about his tweeted self unmasking about whether or not this helps his legislative agenda. >> i think the president would love for us to focus on the legislative agenda awful lot more. if you look at the coverage of the last last month of the extended perry period between may and june all of the major networks if you look at their coverage and what they are talking about they spent one minute in the evening newscasts talking about tax reform, three minutes on infrastructure five minutes on the economy and jobs 17 minutes on health care and
353 minutes, 353 minutes attacking the president and pushing a false narrative on russia. i mean look at that in comparison. if you want to talk about the legislative agenda and focus on policy and priorities you guys get to help set the table and 353 minutes of attacks against the president and driving a false narrative and one minute on tax reform. that's over the course of a month. dice the numbers don't lie back. the media's focus on priorities they don't line up with the rest of america. right now we have got our economy growing come the stock market is up. unemployment is down, jobs are back in isis is on the run. america's winning and that's what we'd like to talk about. but you guys constantly ignore that narrative. >> all of those points he makes sarah the positive elements of the president's agenda are
certainly true. all of those things are true but the president today put out this tweets which takes away from all of that and do you expect us here in this room to simply ignore that? and i think that's a valid question that should be asked to be right now. should we ignore this entirely? >> i think he's put out a number of tweets on health care on the immigration bill that will be in "the house" today but that's not being talked about. that's not being asked about that the discrepancy again, 353 minutes. you can't say the want to talk about policy and then you look at the numbers and they just don't lie. you can't expect for that amount of attack and intensity to come on a president and him to never respond. i said i was going to john next. >> two questions for you sarah. first did the u.s. administration send a representative to the funeral mass for chancellor cole or will they send anyone to the official
funeral service july 1? >> i do believe there's an official delegation. i will have to get details back to you on that. >> my question is this pretty bad people turned out nominations to be deputy secretary of the treasury. the president is on his third appointee i believe for secretary of the army and the ambassador to ireland has declined the nomination and there's no candidates for ambassador to germany or france, both major allies or greece for that matter an important country. as the president having trouble recruiting people to fill some of the key slots that remain unfilled after six months? >> know, john. actually the trouble wasn't in recruitment within the setting and getting them through the process. like i mentioned yesterday there are over i believe 100 candidates in the queue waiting to be pushed through that due to the historic obstruction it's
taking much longer than normal to get a lot of those nominees through and frankly a lot of the people that are part of that process, one of the number one reasons we have had people take a step back is because that process is so lengthy. hold on, i've got a skype question from chris bird in north dakota and we will go to that. >> hey sarah thank you so much. i don't want to talk about any tweets. i want to talk about making america great again and part of that energy dominance in energy week. we had some pretty scary times here in the north. a couple of weeks ago a judge suggesting that the army corps of engineers had prematurely issued some permits. this creates more uncertainty for people. my question is this, what specifically is the administration going to do to give these companies more certainty, more clarity as they
make these multibillion-dollar infrastructure investments to improve our energy? at the same point in time our tribal leaders and tribal nations feeling honored and respected about this entire permitting process. >> it was a little difficult to hear but i believe the question was focused on energy production specific to the dakota access and i think we been talking consistently about this. the president is dedicated to increasing energy production in the united states and we are doing part of the review of the dakota access pipeline is the administration working with those tribal leaders and stakeholders throughout that process to make it as successful as possible. a lot of the tribal leaders also want to expand energy production and development in their area and we are going to work continuously with them to try to make that as successful as possible. >> i want to ask you again about
this with russia sanctions legislation in congress. as secretary mineta and said the administration wants to go to the upper limits of the law and keeping those sanctions on russia. why not support this legislation that basically keeps what has been slapped down and placed? >> we are continuing to read a process and other spinal legislation there. i got another skype question from greg meriwether in louisiana. >> sarah are questions on health care. specifically our governor put out a number that perhaps hundreds of thousands of people in louisiana will lose their health care if this bill goes through. if you add up the other states that kind of puts it into the -- is there an acceptable number behind the scenes of people losing coverage to get the greater bill through? >> again i'm having a little difficulty hearing but as best i could understand you were looking at how obamacare repeal and replace would affect the state of louisiana.
i mean frankly louisiana has been one of the hardest hit states in the country by obamacare. their insurance. m.'s have gone up over 125% to the goal here is to give people in the country choices. no one who currently has medicaid will have their benefits cut. we are looking across-the-board for health care plans that will lower taxes, reduce preamps and offer more choices for people in weighs in and across the country and hopefully that somewhat addressed your questions as best i could. >> thanks sarah. the president had let us know that he planned on having in isis news conference to update people on the situation within the next couple of weeks which is now but we are coming up on departure. i'm wondering do you expect that we'd would get that update whether it's a news conference were just kind of remarks before the upcoming foreign trip or whether we need to wait and i also wanted to ask you look like there might be some coverage of
remarks of the fund-raiser yesterday that didn't work out. beyond yesterday are you looking to beginning to do that now for fund-raisers of a certain size to have some transparency and the ability to hear what he's telling donors? >> yesterday was a logistical issue trying to accommodate that at the last minute. as a little bit complicated in the certainly on the table for future events. as for the first question we will keep you posted on when we will have an announcement on that. as you guys know the president is getting ready to depart for the department of energy and will be speaking on that soon. thanks so much. >> no apology from the president sarah?
the trump administration has requested $19 billion for nasa for fiscal 2018. $561 million last than the current year. acting a demonstrator robert lightfoot chair the committee to talk about the budget in future missions including a new space telescope a mars rover and proposed manned missions. senator richard shelby chairs the appropriations subcommittee on science.