Right. Remember that NASA is not a cabinet-level post. Hence NASA has no "line" in the budget. It is lumped under "Indpendent Agencies" in the budget and is actually 'part of' HUD (Housing and Urban Development, I kid you not).
Thus you find in HUD headquarters job titles such as 'Housing and Space Analyst'. One such published a treatise on the cost of housing, comparing everything from a mud hut, a tent, a flophouse, all the way to a penthouse apartment--oh, and the Space Station, too. See, the Space Station is a "dwelling place", i.e., it is "housing".
The HUD analyst demonstrated that the Space Station was the most expensive (hence least cost-effective) housing--and recommended the termination of the program.
Incidentally, every year during budget debates, one of the Kennedy larvae waits until the NASA budget comes up during the deliberations on HUD and proposes that NASA be abolished and its budget be shifted into HUD proper. Every single year in my memory, since the jerk ('from' Connecticut) got there...
--Boris --Boris