The Republican National Committee’s “Obama Spend-O-Meter”, which includes Obama’s plans to increase NASA funding as part of a “liberal fiscal agenda”, has attracted the attention of Sen. Bill Nelson (D-FL). “The McCain campaign has just stepped in it,” Nelson said, according to Florida Today. Some more Nelson comments from the Orlando Sentinel: It’s not only ridiculous, it shows how totally out of it they are… They simply don’t know what they are talking about.”
Those comments, and continued confusion about how an overall freeze on non-defense discretionary spending, as proposed by John McCain, would affect NASA, does present an opportunity for the Republican candidate to expand upon his existing space policy with additional details. Does he support increased funding for NASA, and if so, how much and how would it be paid for? He could also use it to address proposals that Barack Obama put into his space policy in August, such as re-creating the National Space Council and making revisions to export control policies. If nothing else, there may be a few voters in Florida who care about these things, and election day is only four weeks away.
There is no confusion, at least not to this campaign volunteer, about how an overall freeze on non-defense discretionary spending, as proposed by John McCain, would affect NASA. If you listen to McCain discuss his overall non-DOD, discretionary budget freeze, he usually inserts language that, in addition to DOD, “special programs” would not be frozen. An overall budget freeze does not mean a programmatic freeze. McCain’s statements, subsequent to proposal for his non-DOD, discretionary budget freeze, about funding NASA an additional $2B and looking at continuing the Shuttle post 2010 should be evidence enough that McCain is not putting NASA on the chopping block when he gets to office.
As for Senator Nelson…, well, while a great ally to a strong Space program, not even he can figure out how Senator Obama will pay for his many initiatives, most of which dwarf Senator Obama’s stated promise to fund NASA by an additional $2B, esp. in light of the $700B bailout. Nor has the Press pressed him for an explanation. The RNC wants the voters to know what Senator Nelson, and apparently the Press, does not, that is the cost of Senator Obama’s campaign promises.
Senator McCain was for Space before he was for it; Senator Obama was against before he was for it. What bothers many is whether Senator Obama change his NASA policy because he realized a mistake he had made, realized that NASA and its Constellation program are indeed valuable for this country, or was it a purely political move? And will a President Obama carry through on the many, including additional funding for NASA, spending promises once he gets into office?
His previous policy was a mistake born of incorrect impressions and data. He said so publically. Once he realized that his position was founded upon inaccuracies, thanks to Senator Nelson and company, he set out to get verifiable facts and revisited and reformed his space policy, now armed with real facts.
It is quite simply a case of realizing he was not correct and taking steps, publically I might add, to correct his position.
I call that responsible. The man is transparant in his deliberations.
Jim said: “If you listen to McCain discuss his overall non-DOD, discretionary budget freeze, he usually inserts language that, in addition to DOD, “special programs†would not be frozen.”
And just what does “special programs” mean? He has NEVER defined it. He has NEVER stated that NASA would be excluded. If he wants to exclude NASA from the freeze, let him come out and say so. The fact the he has so far refused to do so leaves me unconvinced, totally, that NASA would not suffer under his oversight. So far, to date, he has REFUSED to publically commit to excluding NASA from his freeze. Why?
Jim: I read Senator McCain’s latest speech on the economy, which he gave yesterday in New Mexico. (http://tinyurl.com/5ylkph). Here’s what he said: “I will impose a spending freeze on all but the most vital functions of government.” You’d have to be a really starry-eyed space cadet to think that “the most vital functions of government” includes NASA. I want to believe you, Jim, when you say that McCain would not freeze NASA’s budget, but your candidate doesn’t seem to agree with you.
Senator McCain has maintained that manned Space is vital to this nation’s national security. Therefore, it is a “vital function”. For example, after Senator McCain’s 18 August 2008 meeting on the Space Coast, Robert Block, The Orlando Sentinel Space editor, reported on the meeting and the following statement by Senator McCain,
McCain said that the American people need to understand the [2010-2015 Shuttle Ares/Orion] gap and need to understand that access to space is a national security issue.
I hope this helps shed more light on the Senator’s mindset and how highly he considers NASA.
“If you listen to McCain discuss his overall non-DOD, discretionary budget freeze, he usually inserts language that, in addition to DOD, “special programs†would not be frozen.”
Reference? Is there a speech, policy, article, or even YouTube video where McCain or one of his surrogates is quoted saying that there is a class of “special programs” that will not be subject to the discretionary freeze? And where they state that NASA is included in this class of “special programs”?
Every statement I’ve seen by McCain or the McCain campaign on this topic claims that there is no exception to the freeze.
For example, from the McCain campaign website (add http://www.):
johnmccain.com/Issues/JobsforAmerica/reform.htm
“A one-year spending pause. Freeze non-defense, non-veterans discretionary spending for a year and use those savings for deficit reduction. A one-year pause in the growth of discretionary spending will be imposed to allow for a comprehensive review of all spending programs.”
Or McCain himself in a speech at Carnegie Mellon U. (add http://www.):
johnmccain.com/Informing/News/Speeches/9bb4e69a-36cc-4ca3-b40d-0cdd41a1b812.htm
“As president, I will also order a prompt and thorough review of the budgets of every federal program, department, and agency. While that top to bottom review is underway, we will institute a one-year pause in discretionary spending increases with the necessary exemption of military spending and veterans benefits. “Discretionary spending” is a term people throw around a lot in Washington, while actual discretion is seldom exercised. Instead, every program comes with a built-in assumption that it should go on forever, and its budget increase forever. My administration will change that way of thinking.”
Or a senior McCain advisor, as quoted in Science magazine (add http://):
sciencenow.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/2008/919/1
“‘The purpose of the freeze is to evaluate each and every program, looking at which ones are worthwhile and which are a waste of taxpayer dollars,’ Ike Brannon, an economist and senior policy adviser to McCain, told the Task Force on the Future of American Innovation at a private gathering in Washington, D.C.”
Nowhere in any of these sources is there a reference to any class of “special programs” being exempt from the freeze or to NASA being exempt from the freeze.
“Senator McCain has maintained that manned Space is vital to this nation’s national security. Therefore, it is a ‘vital function’. For example, after Senator McCain’s 18 August 2008 meeting on the Space Coast, Robert Block, The Orlando Sentinel Space editor, reported on the meeting and the following statement by Senator McCain”
The text of the Sentinel article says no such thing. Block’s paraphrasing only claims that McCain said “access to space is a national security issue” (which it is for DOD and intelligence satellites), not “manned Space [sic]”. Unless there’s a transcript or more direct quote, there’s little evidence that McCain stated that human space flight activities have anything to do with national security (which they don’t), nevertheless being a “vital function”.
FWIW…
anonymous.space, after reading Block’s piece and looking at it again in the light of a hyper-critic, as you are, it seems the good OS could use a bit of an english grammar refresher.
Block’s paraphrasing of Senator McCain’s comments is as follows:
“McCain said that the American people need to understand the gap and need to understand that access to space is a national security issue.”
Now, this is still pretty clear to most people, but making it even clearer so that even the most contrarian of contrarians would not be able to misrepresent this statement, and using proper english, this would be,
“McCain said that the American people need to understand the gap, and [they] need to understand that access to space, is a national security issue.”
which is much the same as,
“Pandas eat, shoots, and leaves” rather than “Pandas eat shoots and leaves”
and is a great book, btw.
But in any case, my point is made by Mr. Block, that not only access to Space, but the gap, which is American manned access to Space independent of Russia, are part of our national security.
“‘McCain said that the American people need to understand the gap, and [they] need to understand that access to space, is a national security issue.’â€
Adding the pronoun “they” to the sentence doesn’t change meaning of the phrase “access to space”, which is not the same thing, not by a long shot, as “manned Space [sic]”, human access to space, or human space flight.
“But in any case, my point is made by Mr. Block,”
Block isn’t making a point — he’s paraphrasing points made by McCain.
“that not only access to Space, but the gap, which is American manned access to Space independent of Russia, are part of our national security.”
Access to space for defense and intelligence satellites is obviously critical to national security. But human space flight has nothing to do with national security — the Space Shuttle stopped launching DoD and intelligence satellites back in the 1980s and no other current or future NASA human space flight system (ISS, Orion, Ares, etc.) serves any other national security purpose (recon, intel, signals, comm, etc.). If McCain (or any other candidate) actually made such a claim, they’d be stupid to do so.
FWIW…
So rather than a direct statement by the candidate, we’re left with a campaign staffer dissecting the nuances of comma usage in a newspaper report, and invoking Lynne Truss in the process. For a candidate once known for the Straight Talk Express, it seems a bit sad, or pathetic.
If McCain isn’t sure he’s willing to increase NASA’s budget, why not be direct about it, and in a positive way to boot? Something like this:
“My friends, I strongly support space exploration, and believe that NASA deserves more resources. But unlike my opponent and his trillion-dollar wish list, I’m not sure we’ll be able to afford any extra money for space in the near future, especially with that $700 billion Wall Street bailout the Democratic-run Congress just passed. So if I can’t find the extra money, I will press NASA to be more efficient with the money it has, cut unnecessary programs, support innovative alternatives in the commercial sector, and fight every earmark the Congress tries to add to our nation’s space program.”
Consider it my contribution to the McCain campaign, in lieu of cash.
Here is McCain’s site on “America’s Space Program”
http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/Issues/7366faf9-d504-4abc-a889-9c08d601d8ee.htm
I do not see anything about funding anything at current levels or raises. He does not show a single number anywhere.
He does talk about:
“Senator McCain has also spearheaded efforts to control costs at NASA and promote a space exploration agenda based on sound management, safe practices, and fiscal responsibility. “
So Jim; in the end what we are actually left with, is one McCain volunteer’s opinion about what he thinks McCain must have meant. Allow me to point out that we wouldn’t be having this conversation at all if McCain would just come out and say it. But to date, there is no such statement. All we have is your opinion.
The candidate has given you the statements you want and I have given you the links to those statements. And, in the end, you are not left with the impressions of a volunteer, but with the statements of the McCain/Palin 2008 Space Industry Coordinator working out of Titusville, Florida for the past 7 weeks whose sole job is to reach out to the KSC community of Space workers. Tell me, please, who does the Obama campaign have doing that? If Senator Obama wants to do more than talk, he should do what the McCain/Palin campaign did–send someone down to the Space Coast to represent the campaign day-in-day-out from Convention to Election Day.
The McCain/Palin campaign has walked the walk, not just talked the talk on Space. Perhaps someday the Obama campaign will get some skin in the game down here…or, more likely, just keep talking. They are very, very good at that.
Jim Hillhouse
McCain/Palin 2008
Space Industry Coordinator
Brevard County, Florida
“Perhaps someday the Obama campaign will get some skin in the game down here…”
The Florida Democrats have an entire union (the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers or IBEW) riled up about McCain’s budget freeze and it impact on NASA jobs. They’re holding a press conference on the topic today. See (add http://www.):
spacepolitics.com/2008/10/08/mccain-and-his-republican-partys-troubling-stance-on-nasa/
The problem for the McCain campaign is not that Obama has too few representatives in Florida. There’s undoubtedly plenty of Obama operatives on the Space Coast if they’re pulling off these kinds of events. Rather, the problem for the McCain campaign is that their representatives appear to be outnumbered, outmanuevered, and/or just plain ineffectual.
FWIW…