January 31, 2011 at 8:49 pm · Filed under Congress, NASA
When the Obama Administration released its FY2011 budget one year ago Tuesday, the proposal called for spending $6 billion over five years on commercial crew development. After the extended debate on the subject the near-term spending on the program was trimmed in the authorization bill to $1.3 billion in 2011-2013, compared to $3.3 billion over the same period in the budget proposal. However, there was a long-term, if informal, plan expressed by people like Sen. Bill Nelson (D-FL) to commit the full $6 billion to the program over six years, instead of five, implying that commercial crew development spending would ramp up significantly in the 2014-2016 period.
But at least one official doesn’t think that additional money will come, at least at that level. An anonymous Senate aide told the New York Times that the $6 billion over six years won’t materialize. “They’re not getting $6 billion over six years for commercial crew,” the aide said. “That’s never going to happen.” The article didn’t go into specifics about why the aide felt that way, but certainly ongoing debates about cutting federal spending would play a key role. The aide instead suggested the commercial crew program “might receive half that much”. That would restrict NASA’s ability to support multiple providers—Orbital Sciences, for example, estimates a development cost of $3.5-4 billion for its proposed system—and/or also force companies to shoulder a greater burden of development costs.
Fifty years ago, a young President facing mounting pressure at home propelled a fledgling space agency on a bold, new course that would push the frontiers of exploration to new heights. Today, on this Day of Remembrance when NASA reflects on the mighty sacrifices made to push those frontiers, America’s space agency is working to achieve even greater goals. NASA’s new 21st Century course will foster new industries that create jobs, pioneer technology innovation, and inspire a new generation of explorers through education – all while continuing its fundamental missions of exploring our home planet and the cosmos.
Fifty years ago, another young President propelled a fledgling space agency on a bold, new course that would push the frontiers of exploration to new heights. The 21st Century course that President Obama has set our agency on will foster new industries that create jobs, pioneer technology innovation, and inspire a new generation of explorers through education – all while continuing our fundamental mission of exploring our home planet and the cosmos.
January 27, 2011 at 8:02 pm · Filed under Congress
Thursday afternoon the Republican leadership of the Senate Commerce Committee announced the GOP members who will serve on the full committee in the new Congress. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX) will return as ranking member of the full committee, where she will be joined by:
Olympia Snowe, Maine
John Ensign, Nev.
Jim DeMint, S.C.
John Thune, S.D.
Roger Wicker, Miss.
Johnny Isakson, Ga.
Roy Blunt, Mo.
John Boozman, Ark.
Pat Toomey, Pa.
Marco Rubio, Fla.
Kelly Ayotte, N.H.
Notably absent from the list is Sen. David Vitter (R-LA), who in the last Congress served as the ranking member of the committee’s Science and Space subcommittee alongside subcommittee chairman Sen. Bill Nelson (D-FL). Subcommittee assignments have not been made yet, so we don’t know yet who will succeed Vitter as ranking member.
January 27, 2011 at 7:15 am · Filed under Congress, NASA
Sen. Bill Nelson (D-FL) is one of NASA’s biggest advocates in Congress, and has a long track record on space policy. It’s not a surprise, then, that his office released Wednesday a six-minute video (below) of Nelson talking about space exploration, timed to the 25th anniversary of the Challenger accident this week. Most of the video is devoted to generalities about the history and importance of human spaceflight. About four and a half minutes, in though, he talks about the NASA authorization act, which calls for the development “of a new big rocket to replace the space shuttle”, as he described the Space Launch System.
Then he reiterated some tough language from earlier this month after NASA reported it could not currently determine how to develop the vehicle within the cost and schedule constraints of the act. “NASA must stop making excuses and follow this law,” he says. “I believe that the best and brightest at the space agency can build upon the nine billion dollars that we’ve already invested in the advanced technology to design this new rocket, and I think that these pioneers at NASA can also take a stepping-stone, pay-as-you-go approach.
By contrast, Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL), in office only since this month, has virtually no track record when it comes to space policy. In a meeting with reporters yesterday, Rubio said that he considered funding for NASA a priority even with the need to cut spending overall. “Anything you invest in NASA is money that you are using that has the byproduct effect of creating spinoff opportunities in the private sector,” he said, as reported by Florida Today. Launching rockets, he added, is “something we do because it’s important from a military capability, from a national-security capability, and also a commercial and economic capability.” (Much of that capability, though, has little to do with NASA.)
Central Florida News 13, meanwhile, recalled comments Rubio made last fall when running for the Senate, echoing Wednesday’s comments. “Space exploration is not something we do for fun,” he said in the October interview. “It’s something this country does because it has commercial applications, it has technical applications that help us in other fields. It has military and national defense applications.” He also, at the time, pointed to China’s space activities. “Look, China has invested heavily in getting to the moon, it’s not because they want to go up there and collect rock samples. It’s because the believe space is the high ground of national defense, and they want to have space superiority over the United States.”
Reps. Sandy Adams and Bill Posey (R-FL) must be disappointed: contrary to their desires expressed earlier this week, the president did not directly address space policy in his State of the Union address last night. (Well, maybe not that disappointed: Posey didn’t mention the omission in a statement with his reaction to the speech.) Instead, the president made only a historical reference to NASA in his speech, recalling the original “Sputnik moment” over 50 years ago that catalyzed the Space Race. And even that rhetoric wasn’t that new: he used similar language in a speech a month and a half ago in North Carolina.
Some members afterward said they wanted to hear more about space policy in the address. “Absent from the President’s speech, apart from mentioning Sputnik as a metaphor, was any vision for our Nation’s space agency,” said Rep. Ralph Hall (R-TX), chairman of the House Space, Science and Technology Committee, in a statement after the speech (one that, as of this morning, is not posted on the committee web site.) “I am disappointed that the President used this moment only to reflect on NASA’s history, rather than promoting a strong vision for the future of space exploration. This Thursday is officially designated as ‘A Day of Remembrance’ for the space shuttles Columbia and Challenger tragedies; a day to reflect on those national heroes who lost their lives. We should honor them by carrying on their legacy and ensuring that America ‘keeps winning’ in space exploration and scientific discovery.”
Rep. Rob Bishop (R-UT), a staunch critic last year of the administration’s plans to cancel Constellation, kept up the rhetoric in his response to the speech. “However, while the President is calling for ‘new levels of research and development that haven’t been seen since the Space Race’ his Administration is also calling for the termination of our nation’s manned space program – a program whose science and technology research is an essential component of our nation’s missile defense program,” he claimed. “Terminating this program, including the Constellation program, would cede our leadership in space exploration over to countries like China, Russia and India… It would be counterproductive to abandon our role as leaders in space exploration.”
As was the case last week, it was NASA administrator Charles Bolden, in a blog post, who tried to tie discussion of the agency’s past with its future. “At NASA, we’re making contributions in all of these areas,” he wrote, referring to the speech’s themes of innovation, education, and infrastructure, then citing several examples, including the agency’s support for commercial crew development. “The 21st Century course that President Obama has set our agency on will foster new industries that create jobs, pioneer technology innovation, and inspire a new generation of explorers through education – all while continuing our fundamental mission of exploring our home planet and the cosmos.”
January 26, 2011 at 6:32 am · Filed under Congress, NASA
Lost in yesterday’s hubbub about the State of the Union address was the introduction of legislation to radically cut spending by new Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY). Paul’s plan would cut $500 billion in discretionary spending in FY2011 (which is already well underway, although without final appropriations bills) by making major cuts in most agencies and zeroing out some. In the case of NASA, he would cut the agency’s budget by 25 percent, to $13.375 billion, according to a summary he released with the bill. (Paul appears to be cutting from FY2009 levels, when NASA got $17.8 billion, and not FY2010, when the agency got $18.7 billion.) His rationale:
With the presence of private industries involved in space exploration and even space tourism, it is time for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration to step aside and allow innovation to flourish. Looking at ways to reduce NASA’s spending is long overdue.
In addition, NASA has consistently been flagged by organizations like Citizens Against Government Waste, which most recently highlighted NASA’s multibillion-dollar Constellation program, a project that has been focused on the exploration of the moon and Mars. Despite spending more than $10 billion on this program, NASA has made very little progress since the program’s inception.
Finally, since President Obama has determined to realign the goals of NASA away from human exploration, and more on science and “global warming” research, the need to fund the agency at levels not consistent with the goals of the past provides the opportunity to direct funds toward deficit reduction. National Science
That said, the agency does pretty well compared to other organizations. Sen. Paul would cut NOAA’s budget by 36 percent, claiming the agency “has become bloated and its breadth and scope has broadened”. The NSF would be cut by 62 percent under Paul’s plan, under his belief that “research in science is best conducted by private industry for economic purposes,” and he would eliminate the Department of Energy. While the legislation likely stands little chance of making it through Congress, it does add to the debate about spending cuts versus spending freezes, as the president proposed last night.
January 25, 2011 at 12:56 pm · Filed under NASA, White House
Both ABC News and MSNBC are reporting that in his State of the Union speech tonight, President Obama will call for a five-year freeze for non-security discretionary spending. There will be, according to ABC, some exceptions for new initiatives in areas such as innovation, education, and infrastructure, but it would appear that, by and large, agencies like NASA included in that non-security discretionary slice of the budget will be looking at flat budgets for the foreseeable future.
If NASA is, in fact, facing a long-term budget freeze (whether at the enacted FY2010 or the proposed FY2011 level is unclear, although it makes little difference at the topline level), it would be a setback for an agency that last year was projected to see modest but steady increases, to nearly $21 billion for FY2015. On the other hand, though, a budget freeze at current levels might not be so bad compared to proposals to cut overall federal spending to FY2008, or, as proposed last week, FY2006 levels.
Many of the Democrats named served on the committee in the previous Congress, although there are several new members as well. Subcommittee assignments have not yet been announced.
Update 5 pm:The Democratic caucus announced Tuesday afternoon subcommittee assignments. Rep. Giffords will be the ranking member on the space subcommittee; while she recovers, Rep. Costello will serve as acting ranking member. Other Democrats on the subcommittee include Reps. Fudge, Sewell, Wu, Edwards, and Wilson.
Update 6:30 am Wed:A statement from Rep. Costello on being named as acting ranking member of the space subcommittee: “Congresswoman Giffords, my good friend and colleague, has demonstrated strong leadership as a member of the House Science, Space, and Technology Committee, particularly on the Subcommittee on Space and Aeronautics, where she has been a true champion of our nation’s space program. I look forward to Congresswoman Giffords’ continued work as the Subcommittee’s Ranking Member when she returns to Congress, and I am honored to serve as Acting Ranking Member during her recovery.”
January 25, 2011 at 6:56 am · Filed under Congress, NASA
In an editorial Saturday, the Orlando Sentinel complains that Congress is “making a mess of the U.S. space program.” The editorial complains about the lack of Congressional action to remove a provision from last year’s appropriations bill that now requires NASA to spend money on Constellation programs effectively canceled in the new authorization act, as well as NASA’s concerns that it cannot develop an HLV within the budget and schedule of that act. (On the former issue, the editorial says that Sen. Bill Nelson (D-FL) has introduced legislation to repeal the appropriations language, although that legislation doesn’t show up in Thomas yet.) The Sentinel suggests that NASA administrator Charles Bolden needs to be “pushing back harder” on what it deems unreasonable requests from Congress, “but little has been seen or heard from him on the issue.”
Florida Today is also worried about a mismatch between the agency and Congress, but puts more emphasis on NASA to change how it works in order to meet Congressional directives, it concludes in an editorial Sunday. “NASA doesn’t seem to understand the game has fundamentally changed and it must change with it or be pushed further aside by private companies eager to fully assume the agency’s traditional rocket development and launch role,” the editorial argues, noting it’s unlikely the agency will get additional funding from a more fiscally conservative Congress. “NASA has to bring its new rocket project to the launch pad on time and within budget – for once.”
Potential across-the-board budget cuts, as the new Republican House leadership have proposed, “is causing headaches for one Alabama lawmaker”, namely Sen. Richard Shelby (R-AL), because of its potential impact on NASA, the Huntsville Times claimed Sunday. Shelby is also getting flak for the now-infamous provision in the 2010 appropriations bill, but he has his defenders for that language as well: Steve Cook, the former Ares 1 program manager now working for Dynetics, tells the Times that if Shelby hadn’t acted, “NASA wouldn’t be able to spend any money on any rocket program right now.” (The logic of that statement isn’t clear in the article.) Shelby’s staff also claims that work on an HLV isn’t a new start since it was part of the “existing program of record” under Constellation in the form of Ares 5 (a claim that NASA hasn’t argued against, necessarily, only that there are elements of Constellation is much continue work on, like the Ares 1 upper stage, that would not be part of a new HLV program, as the NASA inspector general argued earlier this month.)
By comparison, Rep. Mo Brooks (R-AL), quoted in the same article, has a much more simplistic outlook: since NASA “is one government program that brings real value to the American taxpayer,” he argues, he’s willing to do whatever it takes to help the agency once they give him specific direction. “I am very happy to help carry the water for NASA and to try my best to get the votes to fund these programs that NASA believes it should be doing for the American people,” he said, “but NASA is uniquely situated with its expertise to know what those programs ought to be.”
And with President Obama scheduled to give the State of the Union address tonight, two Florida members of Congress want the president to discuss space policy in his speech, a bit of a long shot given the long list of other policy issues that could be addressed in the speech, Florida Today reports. “I’d like to hear a speech like John Kennedy — a national commitment to human space flight,” Said Rep. Bill Posey (R-FL). “At a critical juncture for NASA, I think the president owes it to the American people to explain how he intends on preserving jobs along the Space Coast,” said Rep. Sandy Adams (R-FL).
January 25, 2011 at 6:15 am · Filed under Congress
Rep. Steven Palazzo (R-MS), the new chairman of the House Science, Space and Technology Committee’s space and aeronautics subcommittee, is pleased with his assignment, he tells hometown newspaper Biloxi Sun Herald. “I am excited to be able to play a role in shaping future manned space-flight missions and maintaining Stennis Space Center’s critical importance in that effort,” he said, referring to the NASA facility in his district. The director of Stennis, Patrick Scheuermann, is also happy to see his center’s congressman chairing the subcommittee. “Having Congressman Palazzo serve as chairman of the subcommittee responsible for shaping space policy is great for the employees and mission of NASA and Stennis Space Center.”
Rep. Sandy Adams (R-FL), also named to the space subcommittee, says she is “ready to hit the ground running as a leader on space issues” in a statement Monday. “As a past member of the Space Caucus in the Florida House of Representatives, I look forward to continuing my work as an advocate for NASA and emphasizing the importance of space exploration to the rest of my colleagues on the Committee and within the Republican caucus.”
