Congress, NASA, White House

A quick reaction

As many people suspected, the president did not mention space policy or NASA specifically during his State of the Union speech tonight. (The closest item relevant to space policy was a passing reference to “reform export controls consistent with national security”, an always-hot topic for the commercial space industry.) Less than an hour after he completed his speech, one member of Congress, Rep. Suzanne Kosmas (D-FL), issued a statement that, in part, expressed disappointment about the omission:

I am also disappointed that the President did not take this opportunity to highlight the importance of NASA and human spaceflight, especially in light of reports casting doubt on the future of our space exploration program. Human spaceflight boosts our economy, helps develop countless new technologies, and supports thousands of jobs in Central Florida and across the country. Space exploration is also critical for inspiring this and future generations to excel in science and technology that will make us competitive in the 21st Century.
 
The President has pledged to minimize the spaceflight gap and Space Coast families are looking for him to fulfill that promise.  It will be unacceptable if his budget does not reflect a commitment to a robust human spaceflight program.

13 comments to A quick reaction

  • Robert G. Oler

    What puzzles me about the SOTU…is that it was pretty chocked full of “jobs jobs jobs”…and yet if Dr. Ride is correct and we are headed for commercial lift…that creates commercial jobs…

    I am going to think about why it wasnt mentioned…

    Robert G. Oler

  • Sheridan

    I am disgusted with the lack of any mention of Space in the SOTU.

    President Obama wants to inspire the next generation to take up science and math? Yet he refuses to show any vocal support for the flagship agency in those two fields?

    The agency has gotten themselves into such a deep mess that NASA is going to get no Exploration program worthy of the name.

    What a shame we took such an awful detour at the ESAS crossroads and squandered the only serious opportunity we have really had to go back to real exploration in the last 30 years.

    I am disgusted with the whole situation.

  • Major Tom

    “I am disgusted with the lack of any mention of Space in the SOTU.”

    Grow up. NASA hasn’t made a state of the union address since Reagan announced space station in 1984. Bush II didn’t mention the VSE in any of his state of the union addresses specifically because that administration didn’t want to politicize a bipartisan topic.

    “President Obama wants to inspire the next generation to take up science and math? Yet he refuses to show any vocal support for the flagship agency in those two fields?”

    NASA is not the “flagship agency” in science and math. That’s NSF.

    FWIW…

  • If manned commercial flights are only limited to government contracts then they won’t create any more jobs than NASA does. The future of manned private commercial flights is in space tourism– not government contracts.

  • Curtis Quick

    I would tend to agree with Major Tom to some degree here. Not about the “Grow Up” remark, but about why NASA was not mentioned in the SOTU. I honestly think the best hope for NASA is to be left unnoticed by the budget cutters. The more high profile it appears the more tempting a morsel its budget becomes. I suspect that if Obama had stressed the importance of NASA it would have been the kiss of death. His opponents would see NASA as a target to shoot down to get at him and his supporters would have wondered why he was going out on a limb for something that seems so unimportant compared to the troubles that the nation faces. His supporters could even begin to think that he was “out of touch” with the mainstream of national thought. Such a statement of support could well have been a lose-lose for NASA and the administration.

    Now, this is giving Obama the benefit of the doubt and assuming he is as great a thinker as he is a great talker (perhaps the best talker since Ronald Reagan). It could also be that he just did not care enough about NASA to realize that it could be a commercial space jobs catalyst for the nation. I hope for the former, but I have seen enough of the latter in my days to not be surprised if it were the case this time around.

    As I have said before, this seeming disaster for the human spaceflight program could actually be the opportunity to begin the true exploitation of space (by commercial interests) for the benefit of the USA and eventually the whole world. This could be the game changer right here, right now that people will look back on as the start of man’s real conquest of space.

    Curtis Quick

  • Martijn Meijering

    The future of manned private commercial flights is in space tourism– not government contracts.

    And that is exactly what government contracts will help kickstart.

  • Ferris Valyn

    Martijn

    But how can we assume that they can safely fly human beings, when they haven’t demonstrated the capablity to do so?

    /snark

  • John Malkin

    Nothing wrong with government contracts that by private sector goods and services. Many companies used government contracts to start.

    I’m afraid that private commercial companies like ATK, Boeing and Lockheed will use this as a vehicle to sell their own over priced wares in a different form.

    My questions is, if you have a true commercial service what infrastructure does NASA need? Also this is only a LEO vehicle. So if we develop a heavy lift vehicle does that work go to the big expensive guys again?

  • common sense

    @Ferris Valyn:

    “But how can we assume that they can safely fly human beings, when they haven’t demonstrated the capablity to do so?”

    How can we assume the current NASA HSF team will when they haven’t demonstrated it either?… ;)

    Oh well…

  • Major Tom

    “I’m afraid that private commercial companies like ATK, Boeing and Lockheed will use this as a vehicle to sell their own over priced wares in a different form.”

    ATK doesn’t have a launch capability, but Boeing and LockMart EELVs, even if you consider them overpriced, are much cheaper than Constellation alternative.

    FWIW…

  • Bill Adkins

    FWIW. ref. Major Tom’s comment on the last POTUS to mention NASA in the SOTU. I believe the last time was in President Clinton’s 1998 SOTU:

    “Even as we explore this innerspace in the new millennium, we’re going to open new frontiers in outer space. Throughout all history humankind has had only one place to call home: Our planet earth. Beginning this year, 1998, men and women from 16 countries will build a foothold in the heavens. The International Space Station, with its vast expanses, scientists and engineers will actually set sail on an uncharted sea of limitless mystery and unlimited potential, and this October a true American hero, a veteran pilot of 149 combat missions and one five-hour space flight that changed the world will return to the heavens. Godspeed, John Glenn.”

  • Doug Lassiter

    “President Obama wants to inspire the next generation to take up science and math? Yet he refuses to show any vocal support for the flagship agency in those two fields?”

    My experience, in talking to students studying aerospace engineering, is that the antics of NASA over the last few decades have inspired many of them NOT to work on things having to do with our space agency. I’ve been a bit surprised by this reaction, but it’s really pretty understandable. For human space flight, we don’t do anything new. Period. Even for space science, every mission takes an ungodly length of time, and many people work on a concept for many years only to have it canceled. The present fracas in human space flight has left many career-oriented students positively slack jawed. No, it’s not that they love Ares, but that they respect, and expect, visions that are well thought out.

    Yep, this is how it works.

    Sorry, but in the inspiration department, space used to be a good thing. It really isn’t any longer. Students are getting skeptical about careers in NASA space efforts.

    For an elementary school student, someone visiting a school wearing a cool blue uniform is kind of exciting, but as to that blue uniform inspiring hard work in science and math, well …

    The obvious place to mention NASA in the SOTU would have been accompanying the few words said about science and technology competitiveness. Is it really that hard to understand why Obama didn’t mention it?

  • Major Tom

    “FWIW. ref. Major Tom’s comment on the last POTUS to mention NASA in the SOTU. I believe the last time was in President Clinton’s 1998 SOTU”

    I stand corrected. Thanks, Mr. Adkins.

Leave a Reply to common sense Cancel reply

  

  

  

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>