nothing could be further from the truth. we ve already seen secretary tillerson has had tremendous one diplomatic success on the deal he cut with iraq. the president believes in diplomacy. we believe this budget protects that core function of the state department. it just so happens much of the foreign aid the president talked about in his campaign, much of the money that goes to climate research, green energy, those types of thins are actually in the state department budget. if those line items had been in the department of commerce, you would see department of commerce having gone down by a similarly large percentage. the question is most of the cuts within the state department try to focus directly on foreign aid. the budget showed a 0.8% decrease for nasa but you also talked about in the administration using private companies, spacex, for example, for more of that. does this show is some of this going to be shifted over to the private sector? does this show a commitment on the
thank you. why? because we think there s been emission creep, we think there are things outside their core function. we think there s room for savings. a couple facilities be combined and cost savings from that. this comes back to the president s business person view of government. if you take over as a ceo and look at this on a spreadsheet and say, why do we have why do we have seven when we can do the same with three, won t that save money? yes. part of your answer is focusing on efficiencies and focusing on what we do better regarding the question as to climate change, the president was straightforward. we re not spending money on that anymore. we think that s a waste of your money to do that. that s a specific tie to his campaign. i have a follow-up. quickly, meals on wheels, you said it s a program you determined have not been doing its job effectively. what evidence are you using to
the soft power. there s a deliberate attempt here to send a message to our allies and our friends like india and adversaries with other countries, shall we say. this is a hard power budget. this administration tends to change course from a soft power budget to a hard power budget. that s a message that our adversaries and allies will take. i ll take more. yes, ma am. explain more about what message the trying to send by eliminating a lot of funding for science and climate change research. just to follow up later. sure. a couple different messages. we talk about science and climate change. let s deal with them separately. on science, we re going to focus on the core function. reductions in the nih, national institutes for health. why? thank you. why?
first candidate. we now have an america first president, and we have an america first budget. the president believes in diploma diplomacy, we believe this budget protects that core function of the state department. when the president s credibility is down, should the united states be retracting from its role abroad? i m joined by the round table. former state department spokes american, mark jacob sell, senior fellow with the pell center. and normer secretary of defense. i don t really like the word america first, it has remnants and is receipt sent of the 1940s situation, people saying we re not going to fight hitler for all the wrong reasons. this fortress america mentality, which is not going to talk to the rest of the world. and it s scary when we re going to try to communicate with the world. no more diplomacy, no more students coming here, justus all alone surrounded by this moat of
attempt to send a message to our allies and friends, such as india, our adversaries, this is a hard power budget. this administration tends to change course from a soft power budget to a hard power budget. that s a message our adversaries and our allies would like. i ll take one more. yes, ma am. can you explain a little more about what message the president is trying to send by eliminating a lot of funding for science and climate change? a couple different messages. when we talk about science and climate change let s deal with them separately. on science, we re going to function there are reductions in the nih, national institutes for health. why? thank you. why? because we think there s been emission creep, we think there are things outside their core