Even if this statement were true (I believe it to be false, or inaccurate at best), it would remain irrelevant. Spaceflight, a cultural & engineering endeavor that includes elements of scientific discovery) has been intertwined with politics from its inception because it has taken public monies and organization to afford it. Even now as some tentatively step into the realm of privately funded spaceflight and space development, politics remains a factor.

Success in space initiatives—all space initiatives—has always, and likely will always, demand a mastery of politics. It may not be to our liking, but “the system” is what we have to work with and proper manipulation of that system is what brings ideas to fruition and allows us to muddle our way to accomplishment…sometimes of great things.

If the “current occupier of the White House” was truly only interested in salvaging his image, his support of the VSE (a practical and far-thinking policy statement, not to be confused with NASA’s current implementation scheme) would have been much louder and more frequently offered. That it was not was a sign that he has been trying to let “the system” work without trying to over-politicize the process or the issues involved.

I wonder if Congress is telling NASA something.

It specifically mentions the “Crew Exploration Vehicle” or “Orion CEV” three separate times.

It does not mention the Ares 1 even once.

The SAP does not use the term “Ares” in any form, whatsoever.

FWIW,

– Al

“Politics is not rocket science, which is why rocket scientists do not understand politics.”

Unfortunately (and not surprisingly), SAPs from prior administrations no longer appear on the White House website. But this kind of strong language is not unusual for a SAP, NASA or otherwise.

FWIW…

… worry about potential unfunded mandates … “For this reason and in view of associated problematic policy implications, the following requirements should either be removed from the bill or appropriately modified: (1) carrying out an additional procurement for Commercial Orbital Transfer Services (COTS) crew capabilities” …

NASA is supposedly reviewing the COTS D option right now (search for “COTS Review in Final Stages” – from Aviation Week June 6 2008). I wonder what the implications of the SAP statement are for this review.

With today’s Space Adventures announcement of a Soyuz ISS flight dedicated to Personal Spaceflight, and apparently getting more customers for these flights, there’s more and more evidence for a commercial market for crew space transportation. Add to this NASA’s ISS needs and the potential for Bigelow to add a new dimension to the market and contribute to transportation development, and it’s hard to understand why NASA wouldn’t want to encourage a U.S. presence in this market for its own needs.

anonymous.space: “But it’s sad that the White House is not taking the budget- and schedule-saving measure that the House legislation introduces of trading the crippled Ares I/Orion for COTS D. Instead of pushing NASA back into exploration and opening Earth orbit to commerce, the White House is now on the record that NASA’s top priority is to stay in the trucking business by contining to build and operate duplicative ETO launch systems”

This is an important point that I want to expand on. The House bill doesn’t trade COTS D for Ares 1/Orion in the sense of cancelling Areas 1/Orion – it (as anonymous.space implies) limits

“to the maximum extent practicable, the use of the Crew Exploration Vehicle to missions carrying astronauts beyond low Earth orbit once commercial crew transfer and crew rescue services that meet safety requirements become operational”.

A big part of why the total for the bill is so high is that it actually introduces COTS D (a small amount of money) *and* increases Ares 1/Orion funding (a huge amount of money, especially considering unlike COTS D that program already exists):

“$1,000,000,000 for fiscal year 2009, to be used to accelerate the initial operational capability of the Orion Crew Exploration Vehicle and the Ares I Crew Launch Vehicle and associated ground support systems, to remain available until expended.”

and

“COTS CREWED VEHICLE DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There are authorized to be appropriated to NASA for the program described in subsection (a)(4) $50,000,000 for fiscal year 2009, to remain available until expended.”

plus

“There are authorized to be appropriated to NASA for the provision of International Space Station-compatible docking adaptors and other relevant technologies to be made available to the commercial crew providers selected to service the International Space Station $50,000,000, to remain available until expended”

As for Congress, Diana De Gette from the 1st Congressional district here in Colorado once told me, and I paraphrase her conversation, not repeat it verbatim ” I don’t care about space – no one else here cares about space, and it’s a waste of money when we have other concerns more important than sending people into space or to other planets, so don’t bother me with space issues again!”.

Tom Tancredo also told a local conservative talk show host’s guest who brought up the issue of VSE, and the failure of the Bush Administration to back up their proposal with sufficient real money to make it happen (and again I paraphrase, not parrot his response): “I think there are more important things for the Administration to be spending money on than sending it into space, or to Mars” “We need to spend that money right here on Earth”.

Interesting that (I believe)Tancredo’s district includes the Lockheed Martin facility in Waterton Canyon, and he apparently does not care about space issues one jot, and dismissed the good work and the many space workers there as apparently extraneous and their work as unnecessary frivolity given the current state of the “War on Terror, the economy, and his pet cause, “Illegal Immigration”.

Mark Udall is doing actual useful work in his position in the House of Representatives, but his is running for the Senate, and space will likely take a back seat to other, (seemingly) larger issues outside the hardcorps of space interested people in Boulder and his district.

I wish the Administration, (any Administration) Congress, (regardless of what session or which political party is in power) the space community, and the American people as a whole could see fit to craft space policy with sufficient funding and political will to actually make it happen, on time and on or close to budget projection, but with Continuing Resolutions being the only way NASA funding is provided, I don’t expect it to change anytime soon. Then again, I could be surprised, because space has a way of surprising me and everyone else involved with it. Maybe everyone involved will get their act together, and pull together for common goals, but with this atomized culture and divided electorate focused on crisis management, and immediate gratification, I’m not holding my breath, but am hoping for the best from the sorry bunch of people the Administration, The Senate, the House of Representatives, and much of the Space Community have proven themselves to be, I’m very sorry to say. I thought space deserved better than this.

I wish I personally knew what to do to fix this mess, but I am only one man, and very worried about the state of the nation, and the state of our civil/commercial/military space programs too.

VSE was a White House initiative. ESAS was a NASA HQ initiative, in which the WH had little interest.

Strongly concur. The Democratic Congress (like the Republican one) has done a poor job of, well, doing its job as the decider of where the money goes in this government. This Authorization is more strategically relevant to America’s needs (such as expanded concern with detecting Near-Earth Objects, something also in the bill); it helps salvage our reputation as an Agency and a country that will not reneg on its commitments (AMS); and throws more weight behind commercial space development, which is another way of saying, sustainable space development.

Hopefully they will stand firm, for the country’s, and for Earth’s, sake.