As last week’s ISDC panel proved, getting the presidential campaigns to talk about space in any detail is difficult: policy comes out in dribs and drabs at town hall meetings and speeches, but rarely to the level of detail desired by space advocates. The argument made for that lack of detail is that space is not a major campaign issue. That runs contrary to what Sen. Bill Nelson said last month, when he said that space policy was “mightily important” to winning Florida, and possibly even Ohio, two critical battleground states in the November election.
Countering Nelson, and upholding the conventional wisdom on the topic, is NASA administrator Mike Griffin, who told Orlando Sentinel space editor Robert Block last Saturday that space was not a major issue in the presidential campaign:
Block: Since we last talked have any presidential candidates or their campaign people come to NASA yet?
Griffin: No. But the same would be true if you asked about the Social Security Administration or Veterans Affairs, or the Department of Energy, or anything else in government. All of the presidential teams are focused on getting elected. They are not focused on running the government if they get elected. It’s just not the way campaigns work
Block: Yes, but with the role Florida could play in an election…
Griffin: Space is not an election issue. Iraq is an election issue, the economy is an election issue, the deficit is an election issue, but space is not an election issue and they are not focused on it. And I don’t expect them to be.
Doubtless for some people space is a campaign issue, but it’s almost certainly a tiny fraction of the overall electorate. There are places, like Florida’ Space Coast, where space is a bigger issue, but as the Florida Republican primary demonstrated, space policy is not a deciding factor even there.
Way to inspire space advocates. Griffy, you’re doing a heck of a job.
Griffin does indirectly point to one problem (which Scotty McArnold points to in his memoir): candidates are all about getting elected. Sadly, Bush never refocused on actually running the government, instead staying in permanent campaign mode. Which goes a long way to explaining VSE (unveiled at the very start of 2004 and capitalizing on the recent landings of Spirit and Opporutnity). And why it is so fraked up. Didn’t I read somewhere that Karl Rove was the one who had the final look at the plan before it was unveiled?
Sadly, Bush never refocused on actually running the government, instead staying in permanent campaign mode.
As opposed to Bill Clinton? That must explain why Bush’s approval rating is so high (not).
This is hilarious.
VDS? (VSE Derangement Syndrome ^_^).
Do you have some kind of substantiation on the “Karl Rove Approved this Space Exploration Vision” thing D. Messier? Would be awesome if true ^_^
Well Rand, when backed into a corner, the old Bill Clinton put down is a great standby. But, it’s getting a bit old though after 7 years, 4 months and 14 days, don’t you think?
You want to explain why Bush initially appointed good old Karl to oversee the New Orleans reconstruction when he had no expertise in the matter? Any idea?
Well, Herman’s Hermit…..I remember reading it on some agency watchdog blog that the plan went past Rove last. That he had to sign off on it before anything got released. I can’t recall if it was before VSE was announced or after that when they announced the specific architecture. (Can anyone help out here?) Might have been the latter because Rove was later given authority over domestic policy, if I recall. That may explain it.
I really like your group’s music, BTW. That whole “I’m Into Something Good” montage in “The Naked Gun”….hilarious….
D. Messier wrote:
Hah! D. Messier and Keith Cowing have something in common there, watch out so he doesn’t sue you for plagiarism ^_^
Whoa! A definite sign of the apocalypse when we agree on something.
[…] Is space a presidential election issue? […]
“Way to inspire space advocates. Griffy, you’re doing a heck of a job….” – D. Messier
Not comfortable with the truth eah ?
Mr. Griffin`s prime responsibility is not to inspire but to administer the agency he heads according to the guidance he is handed as he has stated in public several times.
I certainly understand why he gets so much flack from certain sectors since there are so many people out there that can`t handle reality. He is a very refreshing change from previous recent administrators IMO & I hope he sticks around after the change in the White House.
Oh, and note there is almost NO relationship between what a politician says in a campaign and what they actually accomplish once elected.
Relax and enjoy the ride.
Dr. Spaceman, love you on “30 Rock”….Hilarious….First Peter Noone and now you. So many mid-level celebrities engaged in a space policy discussion.
I disagree with most of your assessment here, but you are mostly right that campaign rhetoric is often a poor guide to what a president will actually do relating to space. It’s one of the reasons I haven’t given it that much attention on my blog.
But Jeff is probably right in that it’s certainly a campaign issue anywhere NASA has a center or a major contractor. In close electoral states (like Florida), it can make a difference.