During the 2008 presidential campaign then-candidate Barack Obama pledged to reinstate the National Aeronautics and Space Council (usually just referred to as the National Space Council), a point he made in his space policy white paper:
There is currently no organizational authority in the Federal government with a sufficiently broad mandate to oversee a comprehensive and integrated strategy and policy dealing with all aspects of the government’s space- related programs, including those being managed by NASA, the Department of Defense, the National Reconnaissance Office, the Commerce Department, the Transportation Department, and other federal agencies. This wasn’t always the case. Between 1958 and 1973, the National Aeronautics and Space Council oversaw the entire space arena for four presidents; the Council was briefly revived from 1989 to 1992. Barack Obama will re-establish this Council reporting to the president. It will oversee and coordinate civilian, military, commercial and national security space activities. It will solicit public participation, engage the international community, and work toward a 21st century vision of space that constantly pushes the envelope on new technologies as it pursues a balanced national portfolio that expands our reach into the heavens and improves life here on Earth.
But nearly a year into his administration, there’s been no sign of any effort to reestablish the council. In today’s issue of The Space Review, Dwayne Day tries to answer that question, suggesting in the end that the “inherent contradiction” of such a council might be the barrier to its creation:
Space council advocates want a space council in order to elevate civil space policy within the White House and increase the likelihood that civil space issues will be considered by the president. In other words, to lobby the president on behalf of civil space. And the last thing that presidents, or their senior advisors, want is yet another actor trying to exert influence on the president and make demands on his time.
We may get a clearer understanding of this once the ongoing space policy review within the administration is completed.
“Space council advocates want a space council in order to elevate civil space policy within the White House and increase the likelihood that civil space issues will be considered by the president. In other words, to lobby the president on behalf of civil space. ”
I do not agree with this statement. A carefully implemented council would not be an advocacy council. Rather, the President will issue soon (?) a space policy. A well crafetd space policy will make use of at least the DOD, Commerce Dept. and State Dept. Herding all the players will be a major task for something (space exploration) that may be argued to be minor in any administration. However a well handled successful space policy might have a great impact, image-wise, on any White House. So I argue it is not about advocacy but rather about properly implementing the policy through only (?) one organization that would directly report to the President.
What I see is that Obama and his people wanted a Space Council that would “oversee” a number of space programs and projects within the confines of pre-established policy. At the moment, that pre-established policy doesn’t exist, and won’t exist until Obama makes a number of decisions about whether Ares development should be continued, whether the USA will return to landing people on the moon, reshuffling/funding/killing various DoD and NSA space projects, etc. This isn’t going to happen quickly, so the need for a low-level set of bureaucrats and staff to provide oversight and coordination between different agencies is small.
“Common sense” has got it right, in other words. I’m just amplifying his throughts.
@Mike Shupp:
Why do you say “low-level” set of bureaucrats? If such a thing must work then low level won’t help that is for sure. It needs to be staffed with representative of the various departments (DoD, Commerce, State, etc) that have direct or next to direct access to the Secretaries and the President themselves for the day to day work as described here http://history.nasa.gov/spaceact.html Anything lower than that does not make sense and would only be another failure in the making for Space.
Common Sense:
As I imagine things, a “Space Council” operating out of the White House would be essentially staffed by a mixture of PhDs (Associate Prof-level) and middling high level bureatcrats seconded from OMB, State,DARPA, NSA, NASA, DoD, etc. They’d report to their own agencniencies and to somebody , probably wearing several hats, like a Special Assistant with enough seniority to talk to VP Biden or the Prresident’s Chief of Staff. As individuals, they’d have enough power themselves to provoke one or two man investigations of various concerns that were presented to them (“is NASA funding research that will facilitiate NSA usage of the 60-62 Ghz frequency band for use in the post-2020 era?” ) They would NOT have any sort of policy setting or control function; it’d be in their power to report to their boss or the OMB that NOAA was spending 240 million bucks on futuristic weather satellites not yet authorized by Congress, but not to dictate to NOAA whether or not 5 million dollar studies of future weather systems were allowable.
Basically, these would be people charged with making sure the various space-using agencies stayed on the same page with presidential policy and OMB guidance, and with doing what they could behind the scenes to make things operate a bit more efficiently. Low level.
Maybe I’m wrong. I’ve not worked in the White House, nor done a lot of studying about its operations. But I can’t imagine a Space Council with enought power to influence a President’s choice of policies or an Agency head’s choice of contractors or schedule.
Back in JFK days, when we were all f****** ignorant and big decisions had to be made quickly, like whether the Apollo program should use Earth Orbit or Lunar Orbit Rendevouz, a SC that could walk into the Oval Office as a group and offer advice that the President would accept made sense.
But in our time … the Big Decisions (Ares or COTS, Moon or Look-But-Dont-Touch, when?) will be made by the President. Funding and timing will be decided by OMB. The actual issues that might be entrusted to a Space Council to investigate/settle are … mush.
—————-
If you’ve some very different view, I’d love to hear it.
“They would NOT have any sort of policy setting or control function;”
I think hmm yes and no. The policy is the choice of the WH, the role of the NASC would be to make sure the policy is being implemented/enforced. If not it’d be their role to enforce and report to, as you say, the President or VP, since either would run the show. But I’d rather have the President.
“Basically, these would be people charged with making sure the various space-using agencies stayed on the same page with presidential policy and OMB guidance, and with doing what they could behind the scenes to make things operate a bit more efficiently. Low level.”
Agreed on the function not on the “level”. It all depends how much “discretionary” power they would have. But again it would not be their mandate to “influence” the policy unless specifically asked to. A la Augustine panel if you will. I think that panel constitutes a nice experiment in that matter.
“Funding and timing will be decided by OMB.”
I don’t believe OMB can go against the President’s directions. It’d be the role of the NASC to ensure they would not. Someone has got to be responsible and accountable. I see NASC as that “someone”.
I know it is not quite clear in my mind just yet and neither do I know how politics are being played at the WH but this does not seem to me like an incredibly difficult thing to do. But…
I think overall we agree save for the “low level” thing.
Oh well…