Post for Meteorologists: There Are No Proposals to Cut the National Weather Service's Budget at This Time

Another well-known and respected meteorologist has written an essay (not going to name him) expressing concerns about the future of the National Weather Service and that is just fine. 

Among other things, he wrote:

I would encourage them and all of you to support my colleagues at the National Weather Service during this time. Their service is absolutely invaluable. 

I agree. However, as far as I can tell -- and I did a web search just before writing this -- there are no proposals to cut the National Weather Service. President Trump has publicly said he doesn't support making cuts in this area. 

That said, there are plenty of reasons to cut or redirect how parent agency NOAA spends its money. While the NWS field offices are understaffed and the entire organization has so little money that it cannot perform its mission successfully, NOAA is busy handing out eight-figure "grants" for climate "education" and other projects with, as far as I can tell, no accountability for the results of the grant. Example below from today's news.

Note: part of the NOAA grants include funds to lobby Congress for even more money! Has anyone gone to Rhode Island to see if they did the work or if the ocean is measurably cleaner as a result of our money being spent on this? The reasons Democrats like Whitehouse are so up in arms over DOGE is because it threatens their money streams. 

NOAA also spends shockingly large amounts for DEI and other items that have nothing to do with NOAA/NWS's mission. So, it is possible NOAA's budget may see cuts pertaining to this nonsense while the NWS receives equal, or preferably, increased funding. 

As you know, I believe the weather part of NOAA should be completely split off and the NWS made an independent agency like NASA. I explain here. 

Four days ago, I linked to and commented on, Dr. Cliff Mass' proposal to make major changes to NOAA. Previously, we discussed Dr. Ryan Maue's proposals. Joe Bastardi, a well known and innovative private sector meteorologist has published his suggestions to, in his words, move NOAA "away from its shady past." His essay is here. The point is 100% of the people I know within the profession of weather science believe major changes are required.

While on the subject of gross government overspending in the field of atmospheric science, take a look at this:

I thought I misread it the first time. The yearly U.S. Climate Assessment is done via climate scientists and advocacy organizations meeting and exchanging ideas and data. But, it does not create data nor does it run instrument networks, et cetera. In the private sector, an annual enterprise like this would cost $10 million a year, not 4,400 times that!! This is ripe for cutting literally billions. 

Of course, I can already read the headlines: Trump Cuts Climate Research. Somehow, the articles will fail to mention the grossly bloated budgets. I'm sure Big Climate is already working on the press releases.