Florida Today> this morning published a very brief statement by the McCain campaign designed, it seems, to rebut Democratic criticism that a President McCain would freeze NASA’s budget if elected. The statement, credited to Mario Diaz, Southeast Regional Communications Director for the McCain campaign:
Recently John McCain sent a letter to the President about the strategic challenge that our reliance on the Russians poses to the United States, and the need to preserve the option to continue shuttle flights beyond 2010. We must also redouble our efforts to advance progress on the Constellation program by committing to the additional funding needed to speed up progress to close the space gap.
Update 10/14 8:30 pm: The Hill reports that McCain would provide a “specific carve-out for spending on science”, exempting it from the budget freeze he’s proposing for other non-defense discretionary spending if elected. Senior policy advisor Ike Brannon told the newspaper that NASA’s funding would increase, but did not specify to what degree.
At least that’s something. (Thank you, Mr. Diaz.)
But it’s still unclear from the statement whether the extra funding would be additive to NASA’s total budget or whether it would come out of the NASA topline (and thus force offsets in other NASA programs). And it’s also unclear whether the McCain campaign has dropped Shuttle extension from its plans (a good move, IMO), or whether that’s still in contention as yet another potentially unfunded proposal.
As an aside, it’s troubling to see Constellation get mentioned by name as even NASA now admits that additional funding cannot accelerate Ares I/Orion. It would be better if the McCain campaign just referenced reducing the gap, and left the specifics until after they’ve had a chance to assess the poor state of the program and explore alternatives. But that’s a mistake that the Obama campaign has made in past statements, too.
FWIW…
Considering the record of the White House over the last 8 years, and in light of McCain’s recent and regular calls for a freeze of discretionary spending, without excepting NASA, I firmly believe that there’s little to thank Mr. Diaz for in this statement. I will not be surprised if McCain’s plans, if any, are to rob Peter to pay Paul, as in cutting funding to space and Earth science missions to pay for the more visible manned programs.
Certainly Space has gotten an outsized bit of attention (thankfully) due to the closeness of The Race. Of the two campaigns (trying to remain mostly neutral here!) Obama still labors under the weight of his earlier statement that he would seriously cut space exploration to direct the money into education.
Of course he has since delved into Happy Talk – offering few specifics.
The McCain campaign mostly did not address space very directly, until now.
I could argue that both are saying what they think the voters of Florida want to hear (even Obama still sees Texas as a McCain heartland) but has either campaign had a change of heart or just vocabulary? Is the large Obama cut to space exploration just been swept under the rug? We may yet find out.
As a fiscally conservative, budget hawk type of person – areas that are supposed to be among McCain’s strengths – I’m not too impressed by McCain’s priorities for NASA. I wouldn’t dedicate additional funding to the Shuttle or Constellation, which are already budgetary disasters. I’d emphasize areas with higher payoff per dollar – COTS, COTS D, Centennial Challenges, use of commercial space (suborbital and orbital), small science missions, etc. In the general space policy (not just NASA) I’d also try to reform ITAR and bring ORS to the forefront.
However, at least McCain’s position is getting clearer, which is commendable.
[…] his support for a $2 billion increase for the NASA budget.” Such a statement, coupled with other recent comments from campaign officials, could help erase any ambiguity or uncertainty about exactly how McCain would fund NASA if elected, […]
Charles in Houston —
I really should resist the temptation to say this, but…
ARE YOU FRIGGING KIDDING ME?
The Obama campaign has repeatedly and concretely disavowed the year-old education policy proposal to use NASA funding to pay for a school initiative. That was done without space input by some education staffers. They have since identified another offset.
This is OLD NEWS. Stop beating a dead horse.
Furthermore, Obama has come out with a SEVEN PAGE policy prescription on space that includes strong support for commercial and innovative military space ideas. Is that SPECIFIC ENOUGH for you?
For chrissakes, I’m a McCain supporter. I was honored to serve as a surrogate for the campaign at the AIAA Space 2008 conference.
But saying Obama wants to slash NASA’s budget is a stupid lie.
– Jim
Oh, by the way…
I’m delighted that MY GUY is speaking to the Florida space community tomorrow, and confirming his belief that space isn’t just another discretionary domestic program.
However, like Anonymous.space and Red, I hope that Senator McCain talks about COTS and other *effective* ways to reduce the gap tomorrow…
Hopefully this does not sound too much like a reflexive defense of my earlier statement…
Jim Muncy must have had way too much coffee when he posted his reply, as his reply did zig far from the original intent of the Space Politics article that I was referring to. The Space Politics article is mostly about John McCain (and both candidates’ support of NASA) but Jim repeatedly mentions Obama only.
The original article said that John McCain was committed to NASA funding and (disclaimer here – I am a McCain supporter!) I still maintain that it is happy talk designed to appeal to voters in Florida. For instance Barack Obama wants to spend an additional 2 billion on NASA (according to the Obama space policy on the Obamanaut web page) but he does NOT say where it will come from. The policy does state that “NASA will develop K-12 activities” etc but does not state if that refers to the ones they already do, or will he divert more resources to that? Or fewer??
Jim apparently felt that I was directly attacking Obama, or directly supporting McCain. My comments did neither.
But a few specific comments:
Charles in Houston —
I really should resist the temptation to say this Yes, you really should have!!, but…
ARE YOU FRIGGING KIDDING ME?
The Obama campaign has repeatedly and concretely disavowed the year-old education policy proposal to use NASA funding to pay for a school initiative. That was done without space input by some education staffers. They have since identified another offset.
That was a major statement and you cannot pass it off as a sentence put into someone’s teleprompter by an intern!!! And what other offset has been given???
This is OLD NEWS. Stop beating a dead horse.
Furthermore, Obama has come out with a SEVEN PAGE policy prescription on space that includes strong support for commercial and innovative military space ideas. Is that SPECIFIC ENOUGH for you?
NO IT IS NOT!! The Obama (and McCain) space policy is a list of things they would like to do, but they never say how to pay for any of it. Some of the statements in the policy comparison make a careful reader wonder if resources will be diverted. Obama also wants to work more with international partners – does that mean he would be happy to hand over the Space Station to the Russians or Europeans?? We do need specifics and not just generic statements.
For chrissakes, I’m a McCain supporter. I was honored to serve as a surrogate for the campaign at the AIAA Space 2008 conference.
But saying Obama wants to slash NASA’s budget is a stupid lie.
And if you actually read what I said – that is NOT in there. And does Obama labor under the weight of his earlier statement??? Yes, even if he has changed his mind now. That still greatly influences the thinking of people in the Houston area today.
– Jim
But this thread is so old now that we have moved on.