It seems like there are more articles these days about the lack of space policy specifics from the presidential candidates than there are articles about what policy statements they have made. The latest in that former category is a report by the public radio program Marketplace, which reviews the lack of discussion about space policy from the campaigns and some of the space issues that the next president will face.
Compared to the recent CNN report that was rather thinly sourced and concentrated on building up the (perceived) threat of China, the Marketplace report takes a broader, and more thoroughly researched, review of the issue. For example, the report includes comments from a number of experts: Lori Garver, Theresa Hitchens of CDI, John Karas of Lockheed Martin, and others. Also, rather than focusing on issues like the gap or the rise of China, the article looks at a bigger range of issues, from space weaponization to workforce concerns.
Garver, representing the Hillary Clinton campaign, does offer space advocates a bit of hope: “I think as president, she would encourage more international cooperation, more commercial development, and if it requires more money, she would support that.” But the report in general is not hopeful about getting more specifics about space policy from the campaigns in the next six months: “[S]pace policy now has bigger down-to-earth competition for the candidates’ attention: high food prices, oil prices and foreclosure rates. It seems those with billions staked on the next president’s space policy will just have to wait and hope.”
I am surprised Marketplace did not at least discuss the space policy statements issued by the Obama and McCain campaigns. It was very poorly researched.
“Someone”: the report did mention Obama’s proposal to use NASA funding to support his education plans, and that McCain has “hinted at a continuation of the Bush space policy”, which does indicate Marketplace did their homework. Just because they couldn’t get officials from either campaign to talk about their statements doesn’t mean the report was “poorly researched”.
NASA is white collar welfare. Why would any candidate advocate to spend more money on welfare?
The Marketplace piece is infinitely better than the CNN piece, and it’s nice to see at least a passing mention of the military and commercial space sectors. But after reading the transcript, I’d argue that Marketplace tried to do too much in too small a piece. The transcript barely touches on each candidate’s stance on civil space, and the military and commercial references are very limited. One would think it would be possible to do a series of pieces, each a couple minutes in length, to do each sector or campaign justice. And that such such a series would do more to keep certain listeners tuning in each day, rather than detract from issues that draw a bigger audience.
FWIW…