Although I can see some possible advantages to switching all astronomy support to NASA, I am afraid that the disadvantages in the long run out weigh the advantages. The advantages are that NASA has a much larger budget than NSF (Astronomy Division), so adding NSF's component of support for ground-based astronomy would be a relatively small perturbation on NASA's budget. Also, the NSF Astronomy Division seems to have continuing problems competing with other divisions for support for astronomy. Although NSF has received several infusions of funds in the past few years, it seems that astronomy has not benefited proportionally in these budget additions.

My concerns are that NASA's main mission is to support space exploration and space science. In this environment, I wonder how the majority of astronomers would fare who depend on small grants, whose research is not tied directly to space missions. How would the national observatories such as NRAO and NOAO as well as university operated radio facilities such as OVRO and BIMA be handled? In times of tight budgets, how would ground-based astronomy programs be funded relative to those of space astronomy programs? What about support for new instrumentation for existing telescopes and development of new telescope facilities? How all this works in the end would depend critically on how it is arranged within the NASA administrative hierarchy. If a separate administrative branch could be established within NASA to administer ground-based astronomy programs which is sensitive to the requirements and breadth of these programs, this might actually be better than the present arrangement with NSF whose Astronomy Division has serious problems, not the least of which is that the director of NSF is no great friend of astronomy.

Fundamentally, however, putting astronomy funding all under the wing of a single agency is probably a bad idea. We would be putting all our eggs into one basket and the fortunes of the disciple would swing up or down with the budget exigencies of this single agency. Given NASA's main mission, it is difficult to believe that ground-based astronomy would fare proportionally during times of budget down swings.

Thanks for giving the opportunity to comment on this very important decision. I wish the panel wisdom in it deliberations.