That’s the summary of Jim Muncy’s presentation Friday morning at the Space Frontier Conference about the status of HR 3752. According to Muncy, a couple of weeks ago Senate staffers sent proposed changes to the House for HR 3752 and those changes “were an abomination”. The Senate, he felt, had the best of intentions by ensuring the safety of passengers, but by incorporating the safety of passengers into the AST charter at the same level as the safety of the uninvolved public (currently the FAA’s mandate) the bill would have the effect of “strangling” the new commercial spaceflight industry.
It is, though, too soon to write off the bill. According to Muncy, several Senators have stepped forward to keep the bill from passing in the Senate on Friday by unanimous consent. Between now and the lame duck session in November, there are plans to bring together everyone involved with the bill—staffers, FAA officials, industry representatives—to try to work out a compromise that will protect the industry from overregulation. There’s no guarantee that something can be worked out, but in the view of Muncy and much of the industry, no legislation is better than the current bad state of the legislation.
For those interested in salvaging this bill, there is something you can do. Muncy asked everyone at the conference to contact their Senators and ask them to tell the Senate Commerce Committee to compromise with industry on the bill and avoid overregulating the industry before it is born.
The question that has been cropping up without answer is who are these unknown and unelected staffers? What Senator(s) hired them and then gave these staffers the authority to write legislation? The world wants to know! Is it possible to determine the scoundrel’s name or will they turn into capital mythology like a 21st century deep throat?
Jim can’t say. He was shown the text of the Senate bill on condition that he couldn’t take it and show it to anyone else. So he probably can’t say who the staffer is or even who’s office that staffer is in. Jim decided to break the normal silence that happens before a bill actually gets public airing since the time frame was so short. Because of that you will probably never know who in the Senate came up with that language.
Wait, what??? I’ve only been following this kind of stuff for a little bit but isn’t our right to know this kind of thing? Freedom of information act and all that?
perhaps this I’m assuming too much regarding transparency.
FOIA doesn’t cover conversations in smokefilled rooms (or their 21st century equivalent), Mark. Who did it is less important now than getting the problem fixed.
Right on, Rod!
I respectfully disagree with the “who did it is less important now” statement. Right now, let’s find out who is responsible and organize ballot box punishment. Favor friends, fuque foes.
Jim – let’s have a leak, right effin’ now!
Go to http://www.nasawatch.com/archives/000267.html and there is a link for the Senate working draft of H.R. 3752
More info to be added shortly.
http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=15252
House Passes Bill Extending Protection for Satellite Launches
“The indemnification provisions in H.R. 5245 were originally part of a larger bill, H.R. 3752, to make additional changes to the Commercial Space Launch Act. H.R. 3752 would have set up a new regulatory regime for private human space flight. The House and Senate are continuing to negotiate a compromise version of that bill.”
Actually, who did it is less important than why it was done. If it was done out of simple lack of clue, education may solve the problem, but if there are other agendas, we may have a much bigger fight on our hands.
Who did it is critical, actually. With that information we know why it was done…and can more effectively move against them if their intentions are nefarious.
Just by knowing who did it doesn’t tell why it was done. The office of So in So doesn’t implicate So and So. Only if we look at this amongst their entire record on the matter.
Even then it might be noise as if it is a staffer, a number of possibilities occur to me.
1) Tricked by a lobbyist.
2) Paid by a lobbist.
3) Parents income is devired in a large part by the shuttle.
4) Staffer was against a deadline so he turned to the only precedent he knew of, exsisting FAA airline regulation. And didn’t have full understanding what that regulation has done and entails.
two of those are of the basist intent, One of them is neutral and the last is of the highest intentions.
I was a bit out for blood until the blame was placed on a staffer. That could of been a ruse but we must look at the full record of Senator So and So, before we light the torches.
Apply the same safety standards to rafting, mountain climbing and shark surfing?