While Save Space has gone into overtime in its bid to solicit a half-million letters to the White House on space exploration policy, members of Congress are also writing letters, to both fellow members of Congress as well as the White House. The Orlando Sentinel reported Wednesday on the latest effort by Congressman Bill Posey (R-FL) to extend the space shuttle past its current retirement in early 2011. Posey’s letter to Congressional appropriators asks them to include language in the final version of the appropriations legislation that funds NASA that would keep the agency from carrying out anything that “would preclude the possibility of flying the Shuttle beyond the current flight manifest”. Keeping the shuttle flying has a been a key issue for him to reduce the gap and its effects on the Space Coast’s economy: earlier this year he and Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL) introduced HR 1962, a bill that would authorize NASA to continue flying the shuttle trough 2015 (that bill, though, has not gone anywhere since its introduction in April.)
Posey has also joined a separate effort, led by Reps. Suzanne Kosmas (D-FL) and Ken Calvert (R-CA), to get members of Congress to sign onto a letter to President Obama for additional NASA funding. “We must ensure the President works with Congress to take this unique and fleeting opportunity to show a true commitment to NASA,” the “Dear Colleague” letter states, according to a copy published by the National Space Society. The deadline for signing onto the letter was today; ten members had done so according to the NSS posting last week.
If nothing else does, summaries like this should convince “the true believers” that space and human spaceflight has almost no staying power in terms of national issues…that it is a product of the various pork centers around the country…and that Obama making major changes in it, while generating a lot of db…will not generate much real opposition.
Robert G. Oler
The letter is too public for our politicians. It means they would actually have to commit to something. Personally I think 90% of congress should resign in shame before this decade is out. How would congress react today if our President said “We would land the first man on the moon in coming decade not because it’s easy but because it’s hard.”?
The Save Space effort will face one small logistical problem. The White House postal security process holds up the mail two-to-three months (especially letters addressed to POTUS) for screening. The letters, if they were sent today, will get to the White House after the New Year, at the earliest.
/Fail.
“How would congress react today if our President said “We would land the first man on the moon in coming decade not because it’s easy but because it’s hard.â€?”
They’d probably yawn it all the way back home…
How would congress react today if our President said “We would land the first man on the moon in coming decade not because it’s easy but because it’s hard.�
That probably depends on how much pork their home district stands to gain or lose. Those who stand to gain would support, those who would lose would oppose, and the rest wouldn’t care mainly because the citizenry wouldn’t care.
Sadly, NASA HSF is nothing more than a jobs program now. If a politician has a NASA Center in their district, they are in favor of NASA. If not,,,,yawn.
Is it even possible for NASA HSF to be more than that?
“Is it even possible for NASA HSF to be more than that?”
Of course it could but they have to get the heck out of the Cold War mentality. They MUST embrace what is important to the next generation of voters not to those nearing retirement daydreaming of Apollo… They MUST provide opportunities to those who actually want to go to space, be it LEO or eventually elsewhere. Make it more democratic in a sense. Get the people to dream and show that they have an opportunity to actually go there. It may be through a NASA HSF a la Apollo (doubtful) or supporting NewSpace (Virgin, SpaceX for example). They MUST have a clear path or help develop one that will “guarantee” someone to actually fly. Not the current astronaut selection process that no one really understands, not even NASA. But of course there must be an overarching plan, a plan that’d be shared by universities and industries… Industries create a need, universities provide the workforce and NASA glue all that together…
Oh well…
How would congress react today if our President said ‘We would land the first man on the moon in coming decade not because it’s easy but because it’s hard.”
They’d probably say “What’s really hard seems to be remembering that we already did it four decades ago!” Now, getting a thirteenth astronaut there … that’s the ticket.
But yes, at least some of these HSF advocates are in full pork mode. Their legislative efforts are no doubt partnered with ones requiring that astronauts only be served orange juice. The transparency of their goals is really striking. At least they could pretend to be endorsing some higher accomplishment with true national relevance.
John Malkin wrote @ November 5th, 2009 at 4:26 pm
How would congress react today if our President said “We would land the first man on the moon in coming decade not because it’s easy but because it’s hard.�..
my response would be “why”?
Robert G. Oler
There’s no way the Obama administration and most Democrats want to live through 5 to 7 years where there are no manned launches from US soil. That would be political suicide!
The American people believe in the hope of a better tomorrow. And the manned space program is the ultimate symbol of that.
@ Marcel: :There’s no way the Obama administration and most Democrats want to live through 5 to 7 years where there are no manned launches from US soil. That would be political suicide!”
Marcel, Marcel, Marcel. Look. If I am a politician NOT from a district that has a NASA center in/around/near it, then the folks that vote me into office do not care one iota about ‘the dreaded gap’. What those American folk want from their politicians is ‘bring me the bacon’. I doubt they will be up in arms with pitch forks a blazin, storming the halls of Congress demanding the ‘gap’ be reduced.
NASA is the ‘dessert’ at the buffet table. When you go on a diet, you always cut out the dessert. Americans get that.
Keep writing…stuff… letters are by the pound, I think.
Just to clarify, I meant if the original landing never happen.
5 to 7 years where there are no manned launches from US soil… would be political suicide!
Refresh my memory on the Administrations and Congresses that offed themselves between Apollo-Soyuz (1975) and STS-1 (1981) ..?
Marcel F. Williams wrote @ November 6th, 2009 at 3:24 am
There’s no way the Obama administration and most Democrats want to live through 5 to 7 years where there are no manned launches from US soil. That would be political suicide! ..
ok for whom?
Robert G. Oler
Well, if the campaign didn’t work it looks like something did.
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/nation/6706161.html
It notes the Senate has restored the $4 billion cut by the House to the NASA budget.
@Monte Davis
The Carter Administration couldn’t exactly be considered a success.
It’s not suprising the NASA HSF is going nowhere: Some here seem to already live on another planet. Pretty disturbing.
How serious does it look in front of Americans suffering job loss or otherwise foreclosure? Hmm? Any idea? “I don’t care because [I] want to go to Space otherwise [I] am not going to vote for [you]”. Pretty sad.
Oh well.
Anon…a few decimal places off…400 million, not 4 billion…and the Senate and House always go at this
Robert G. Oler
“It notes the Senate has restored the $4 billion cut by the House to the NASA budget.”
Per the article, the Senate mark “would restore” the House cut to the President’s FY 2010 Budget request for NASA if the Senate mark prevails in negotiations on the conference bill. But the Senate mark hasn’t “restored” anything yet, and it won’t restore anything if the House mark prevails in conference.
Please, let’s read, comprehend, and think before we post.
FWIW…
“There’s no way the Obama administration and most Democrats want to live through 5 to 7 years where there are no manned launches from US soil. That would be political suicide!”
The Johnson and Nixon Administrations didn’t suffer politically when they ramped down the Apollo Program and made the Space Shuttle decision, leading to a seven-year gap in U.S. human space flight.
The Reagan Administration didn’t suffer politically when there was a three-year gap in U.S. human space flight after the Challenger accident.
The Bush Administration didn’t suffer politically when there was a two-year gap in U.S. civil human space launch and U.S. astronauts had to fly on Russian Soyuz vehicles to the International Space Station.
Although there is local impact from these gaps, there is none that motivates voters nationally.
“The American people believe in the hope of a better tomorrow. And the manned space program is the ultimate symbol of that.”
It’s a nice sentiment, but when most Americans think of “a better tomorrow”, they probably think of a fatter paycheck, a fully paid mortgage, and their kids in college. Manned space flight, of any kind, is probably well down the list.
We space cadets have to come to grips with the fact that our love of space does not necessarily mean that the civil space program is a national priority for voters or politicians.
FWIW…
@Major Tom, Robert G. Oler
Direct from the article:
“WASHINGTON — In a strong show of support for President Barack Obama’s vision for NASA and manned space missions, the Senate agreed Thursday to hand over all that he asked for: $4 billion to build cutting-edge spacecraft as part of an $18.7 billion budget.”
Obama is getting all that he requested for NASA.
“Obama is getting all that he requested for NASA.”
No, the President hasn’t received anything yet. Also from the article:
“The proposed spending still faces a strong test of wills as the Senate and House try to reach a budgetary compromise.”
The House and the Senate still have to produce a conference bill. Until they do, this is all funny money.
And since the appropriators usually compromise by picking a budget figure in between the House and Senate marks, NASA is unlikely to receive all that the White House requested for the agency in the President’s FY 2010 Budget, in any event.
If you don’t understand how the U.S. Congress works or can’t comprehend articles on legislative issues, then please don’t post on these topics. It’s a waste of other posters’ time to have to correct them.
Thank you…
Posey has only been in office one term, but Schultz was first elected to Congress in 2004. If she wanted to save Shuttle, then she should have started back then, when the Bush II Administration announced in the VSE that they planned to shut down the Shuttle program no later than 2010. I don’t agree with Shuttle extension, but “Hail Mary” letters to appropriators at this late date, in both the FY 2010 budget and Shuttle retirement processes, aren’t worth the paper they’re written on.
Same goes for the Kosmas/Calvert letter on overall NASA funding for FY 2011. OMB has likely already held its Director’s Review and is preparing NASA’s passback, which is sent to all agencies around Thanksgiving. Sending “Hail Mary” letters to the White House after senior officials have made decisions (or only days before those decisions are transmitted) is not an effective lobbying strategy.
I don’t know if it’s laziness, incompetence, or indifference, but it sure would be nice to see a congressional effort to support the NASA budget actually start planning and lobbying early for once, instead of these poorly conceived, executed, and timed desperation plays at the 11th hour.
Ugh…
Let’s not fall over ourselves making a mountain out of a molehill here. So the senate bill included $18.7 billion for NASA. Big deal, it’s still $3 billion short of what the Augustine committee claims is needed to have a “meaningful” exploration program. Not that I had any expectations that congress would magically endorse that extra money, but a small increase over and above Obama’s budget request would have been nice. If for no other reason than to show that the message was recieved, and as Major Tom pointed the compromise bill will probably be somewhere in between the senate and house’s numbers.
From the article “In a strong show of support for President Barack Obama’s vision for NASA…”
What vision? Obama hasn’t articulated any kind of vision yet, unless I nodded off and missed his grand “Kennedy moment”. Did I? The article referenced is crummy journalism at best if that’s its opening statement.
@ Major Tom:
At the risk of sounding like someone who needs to be fitted for a tin foil hat, I suspect they wait until this late hour to protest on purpose.
They want the people back home, especially those whose livelyhoods depend on the space program to think they’re doing something to fight for them, when in reality they couldn’t give 2 ^*#@s about the space program no matter how many jobs are brought to their district.
Either that, or they really are incompetent…
Either that, or they really are incompetent…
I vote for both.
“They want the people back home, especially those whose livelyhoods depend on the space program to think they’re doing something to fight for them, when in reality they couldn’t give 2 ^*#@s about the space program no matter how many jobs are brought to their district.”
Also a viable, even likely, explanation.
FWIW…
“What vision? Obama hasn’t articulated any kind of vision yet, ”
Well yes and no: http://www.fladems.com/page/-/Obama_Space.pdf
It’s as much a Vision as anyone’s…
Anon
but the “increase” is in the 600 million range (right from the article) not a 4 billion increase and that increase (the 600 million) has to be negotiated with the House which passed a lower number…so who knows what the final number will turn out to be.
This all continues the status quo until some decision is made by the administration on “what” comes next
Robert G. Oler
Loki wrote @ November 6th, 2009 at 3:52 pm
@
They want the people back home, especially those whose livelyhoods depend on the space program to think they’re doing something to fight for them, when in reality they couldn’t give 2 ^*#@s about the space program no matter how many jobs are brought to their district…
pretty much. few of them have a clue about what is going on
Robert G. Oler
@Major Tom
No one is forcing you to be the “fact” checker to the world. Its your choice.
“No one is forcing you to be the “fact†checker [sic] to the world.”
No one is forcing you to repeatedly post inaccurate and false statements.
“Its [sic] your choice.”
It is my choice, and I chose to correct inaccurate and false statements.
Do your homework, and I and other posters will have nothing to correct.
Why is that so hard to understand?
FWIW…
[…] you recall last week’s post about a bipartisan “Dear Colleagues” letter to drum up support for increasing NASA’s bud…, there’s a minor update. According to an updated blog post on NSS.org, the deadline for […]