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…

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

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. “

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.

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…

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.

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…

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.