That’s debatable. The existing space industry — and too much of tech industry — makes all sorts of demands regarding education that take years to accomplish as well as constant upgrading to stay employable. There’s more. Younger people are looking at the whole package — and not liking what they see.

Then there is customer satisfaction. Bad management causes real declines there. People aren’t interested — especially now — in buying products and services that don’t really deliver what is promised.

What I’ve seen in Maryland does not bode well for the future.

Sorry, Chuck, but in this economy, they’ll go wherever the work is. The best people may not go to work for NASA, but people will.

There is a real problem that the aerospace establishment does not want to face. “What if Congress funded NASA beyond anybody’s wildest dreams and nobody reported for work?” Young people are turning away from aerospace in particular and tech work in general because of bad work-life balance and bad management of people. Without substantive management reform — some of which was clearly implied by the Columbia investigation — people will not come to work in aerospace — at least in the numbers needed for Constellation etc.

They then attached that language to the must pass Afghan war supplemental. Obama has to sign it and Constellation will live thru September of this year. Congress just sent a message that they are bipartisan in not being indifferent to Nasa.

That is 14 Dems and 11 Repubs sending the message.
In all likelihood, Constellation lives to fight for its life in the 2011 Congress.

Well, it’s correct in the exact same vein that there was ‘bipartisan support’ for the Stimulus bill because 3 republicans voted for it. Nelson and Mikulski are pretty much it at the moment. Other voices (such as Alan Grayson’s sophomorish ‘grilling’ several months ago) from the Democrats have been either in support or silent on the issue.

A lot of these articles state ‘bipartisan’ opposition to Obama’s plan.
Is this just bad reporting?