In The Space Review this week, Taylor Dinerman calls for another attempt at an “Invest in Space Now” bill to promote the development of RLVs. The bill, also known as the Calvert-Ortiz bill after primary sponsors Ken Calvert (R-CA) and Solomon Ortiz (D-TX), was introduced in 2001 to provide tax credits for investors in launch vehicle developers. The bill had over 20 co-sponsors, but was never taken up by the House Ways and Means Committee, reportedly because of the high “scoring” the bill got by the committee staff. (A similar bill was introduced in 2003 but also died in committee.) “They estimated that it would cost several billions in tax revenue over the short run,” Dinerman writes. “Of course, a successful US RLV industry would return tens of billions in revenue to the US treasury over a couple of decades, not to mention the gigantic increase in economic activity that would naturally follow from the opening up of the space frontier.”
Dinerman argues that a new version of the bill would held foster the development of vehicles that could enhance the economy in much the same way that support for the development of transcontinental railroads in the 1860s that made the US “an economic as well as a political whole”. Left unanswered, though, is who in Congress would be willing to take up a new version of the legislation, and how they would get it pushed through Ways and Means (let alone the full House, as well as the Senate.)
More, cheaper Launch Vehicles mean more satellites in orbit. We have so much space junk up there already and it’s getting worse all the time.
We better agree on some standards on how satellites have to be built, that they won’t fall apart after a few years in space and threaten other objects. After that we could think about getting cheaper launchers.
My 2 cents
Dinerman makes some good points about “strategy”.
Jeff’s questions are tactical in nature: “Left unanswered, though, is who in Congress would be willing to take up a new version of the legislation, and how they would get it pushed through Ways and Means (let alone the full House, as well as the Senate.)”
The first steps are setting the correct national goals and selecting the most effective strategy to meet those goals. If the goal is radically lower cost space access, then investment tax credits to encourage increased private investment in space transportation (along the lines of Calvert-Ortiz) should be part of the strategy.
After we agree on the strategy, we can quickly get to follow-on tactical steps such as the “who”, “what” and “how” issues, which includes finding allies and champions on the Hill (who), and dealing with Ways & Means (how).
The real next step, IMO, is “Who is going to take a leadership role on this issue, and make it priority?” This idea has been around for a long time (Orbital was formed, in part, because of access to tax incentives in the 1980s). Tax credits are proven to be effective.
But great ideas, without anybody willing to do the work, are just fantasies.
FWIW,
– Al