Campaign '12

Is one sentence on space enough?

On Tuesday the Democratic Party released its platform, one week after the Republicans did. While space got a two-paragraph plank in the Republican platform, only one sentence in the Democratic one is devoted to space, under the “Out-Innovating the Rest of the World” subheading: “President Obama has charted a new mission for NASA to lead us to a future that builds on America’s legacy of innovation and exploration.” That’s it.

That limited reference to space has caused some grumbling in the space community, who clearly wanted more discussion about space in the platform. However, to put it into perspective, that one sentence is actually more than in the 2008 platform, when space had to share a sentence: “We will double federal funding for basic research, invest in a strong and inspirational vision for space exploration, and make the Research and Development Tax Credit permanent.” In addition, while the Republican platform’s space section was longer, it didn’t necessarily say much more: it lacked specific policy prescriptions, whereas the one sentence in the Democratic platform references the administration’s record (for better or for worse) on space over the last four years.

Curiously, in an editorial Florida Today approves of the brief reference to space in the Democratic platform, saying it is “claiming ownership” of the administration’s policies on space. The Republicans, meanwhile, are criticized in the same editorial “for copping out on space” by not offering a distinctive space policy of their own after years of criticizing the Obama Administration’s policy.

One thing that should be kept in mind is that platforms are not binding policy documents but instead general expressions of what party members like and don’t like on various issues. The only reason we’re paying that much attention to them is that there’s little other specific information out there about where the candidates stand on space issues.

22 comments to Is one sentence on space enough?

  • SpaceColonizer

    Be honest… did the GOP platform actually have more to say, or did they just use more words to say it?

  • Breaking news … Florida Today reports that President Obama might be here in the Space Coast this weekend. Don’t know where or why.

    (Last week to see Endeavour before it leaves for L.A.?)

  • Heinrich Monroe

    I think that’s exactly right that, in terms of forward looking policy, both platforms said pretty much the same thing. The Dem platform sentence was about future policy, and the one sentence from the GOP on future policy was preceded by a paragraph about how great we are.

  • Coastal Ron

    Just goes to show that for both parties “space” is spelled with a little “s”, and there is no National Imperative that is currently guiding us.

    What that translate into is no additional funding in the NASA budget from either party, which is OK for those of us that have been advocating for those things that lower the cost to access space. For those that have been advocating for far more expensive ways to travel to space, like the SLS, it doesn’t bode well – not if you want to leave LEO with humans at least.

  • amightywind

    Is NASA better off than it was 4 years ago? Is NASA better off than it was before Obama redirected NASA like a thief in the night?

  • Heinrich Monroe

    Is NASA better off than it was before Obama redirected NASA like a thief in the night?

    If you’ll recall, before Constellation was put out of its misery, it was a fiscally unexecutable program. So you’ve got the right words. NASA was behaving like a thief in the night, pushing ahead with a program it knew it could not afford. Not sure if NASA is better off now, but the nation now has a human space flight program that is being honest with it. I guess that means the nation is better off.

  • Mark R. Whittington

    I should be noted that there was no mention in the Democratic Party platform of the commercial crew effort. That was wise.

  • Robert G. Oler

    Mark R. Whittington wrote @ September 5th, 2012 at 12:19 pm

    I should be noted that there was no mention in the Democratic Party platform of the commercial crew effort. That was wise.”

    why?

    Obama’s signature effort in space is the commercial crew and cargo…he is going to have that historically be his legacy…just as Bush 43 had a lost space shuttle and 15 billion spent on Cx with nothing to show for them.

    If Obama is headed down tot he space coast he would do great to stop in at SpaceX and be part of the future while Willard is debating the cold war.

    BTW Romney’s bounce is imploding…he has like Lee reached his high water mark. RGO

  • Robert G. Oler

    Stephen C. Smith wrote @ September 5th, 2012 at 6:50 am

    there is a Falcon and Dragon in the hanger. RGO

  • Vladislaw

    LOL … SpaceX is doing all the advertising the Administration needs. The docking with the ISS captured literally millions of eyeballs. It is a trait of our politics that the sitting President gets the credit. Just about every article written about that event included that President Obama was funding commercial crew and SpaceX was a winner in it and would soon be delivering crews to the ISS.

  • Robert G. Oler

    amightywind wrote @ September 5th, 2012 at 10:57 am

    Is NASA better off than it was 4 years ago?>>

    if for no other reason then Mike Griffin is gone RGO

  • Vladislaw

    Considering that NASA was able to shed some of the deadwood we are better off. Once SLS is finally defunded they can push the rest out.

    3000 staff @ 100k per year …

    to quote Dr. Lazarus, from Galaxy Quest, at a mall opening “By Grabthar’s hammer oh what a savings”

  • Rhyolite

    I think the administrations original space policy was one of the best we have seen in years. If I have a beef with them, it is that they didn’t stick to their guns and now we have another monstrosity in the form of SLS. I would prefer to see them zero it out every year in the budget proposal and veto the appropriations bill until it goes away.

  • Coastal Ron

    Mark R. Whittington wrote @ September 5th, 2012 at 12:19 pm

    I should be noted that there was no mention in the Democratic Party platform of the commercial crew effort. That was wise.

    There was no mention of the SLS either, wise or not.

    What part of “President Obama has charted a new mission for NASA to lead us to a future that builds on America’s legacy of innovation and exploration” don’t you understand? Commercial Cargo & Crew has been front and center part of his space policy, and “normal” Republicans would embrace that too.

    Weird.

  • Coastal Ron

    amightywind wrote @ September 5th, 2012 at 10:57 am

    Is NASA better off than it was 4 years ago?

    No question – YES!

    – Four years ago the Constellation program was a fiscal and schedule mess, which the Augustine Commission rightly pointed out that we couldn’t afford it if it was magically handed to us finished. It was an unenthusiastic program that was gobbling up funding for other programs and technologies left and right.

    – Four years ago the ISS was going to be the most expensive temporary space program since Skylab, and it would have left our ISS partners with the firm knowledge that the U.S. could not be trusted to be a long-term partner in any space endeavors. Today it has a long and fruitful life ahead of it, as part of the needed ability to understand how we are going to live, work, survive and expand our U.S. presence out into space.

    – Four years ago our future was depending on Russia for “low cost” rides to space (the Orion/MPCV is “high cost”), now we have a commercial space transportation industry that is on the verge of dominating LEO.

    – Four years ago there was no chance Bigelow Aerospace would have a chance to test out their business plan for leased space stations, and now they are planning to start operation later this decade using the same Commercial Crew providers NASA will use for the ISS.

    – Four years ago the JWST was a program out of control. Bolden stepped in and reorganized it well enough that Congress gave them one last chance to finish the program and launch the observatory. Yet another Griffin mess Bolden had to fix.

    So again – no question about it, YES NASA is better off today than it was four years ago.

  • DCSCA

    Is one sentence on space enough?

    Despicable. But given the alternative, better than simply uttering, ‘God bless Neil Armstrong.” =eyeroll=

  • Heinrich Monroe

    I should be noted that there was no mention in the Democratic Party platform of the commercial crew effort. That was wise.

    I look at commercial crew as an implementation strategy, not as a fundamental goal. Party platforms usually shy away from implementation strategies, and leave things like that to administration discretion. The goal that applies to commercial crew in the GOP platform is “foster innovation and competitiveness”, and that in the Dem platform is “builds on America’s legacy of innovation”. Because that’s what commercial is all about. Taking an innovative approach to space exploration that may lower cost and increase capability. It’s about breaking out of the box. It’s a mistake to think that when politicians refer to innovation, they’re just talking about engineering and technology.

    I think that all this exasperation about how few words are in the party platforms about space is a bit misguided. Fewer words can be more powerful than lots of words if they’re the right words. But no party leader has a good picture of what the fundamental goals of space exploration should be, so they’re happy to take a pass on just making stuff up. I thank them for that. The GOP meandered around a bit before getting to the point, by giving us a long paragraph reminding us how good we are because of what we’ve done. But that’s not a forward goal.

  • DCSCA

    =yawn= Democratic space policy is already in the out box. The focus should be on thealternative- and it’s clear there is none. Accordingly, a lousy space policy is beter than no space policy at all. Advantage, Obama. America’s space program will find its revival in Hillary’s first term.

  • Heinrich Monroe

    “Democratic space policy is already in the out box.”

    The space policy that W left us with, and which Obama did a mercy killing on, is in the incinerator box out back. That policy was Moon, Moon, and more Moon, and funded by fake money. It is really sad that Griffin did such a hit job on VSE. VSE would have been a true space legacy for W and even the GOP, but it was quickly eclipsed by the big “C”. Pretty funny, really. A constellation is a group of stars that, connecting them together in a totally unphysical way, represents something fantastical or ficticious. An excellent metaphor for what turned out to be an essentially imaginary space effort.

    You know, in the 2004 and 2008 Democratic platform, and the 2004 GOP platform, space wasn’t even mentioned. Constellation was worth an oblique reference in one sentence in the GOP 2008 platform. That was it for space. The Dems have one sentence now, and the GOP has about the same content in a paragraph. Seems like we’ve actually come a long way, no?

  • NeilShipley

    DCSCA wrote @ September 5th, 2012 at 7:19 pm

    There doesn’t need to be focus on space by anyone since it’s not anywhere being a major issue. NASA spends what 0.05% of the U.S. budget so gets a line or a minor mention here or there. Not worth the effort for more.
    You heard or watched the nomination launches. You think anyone in those audiences (well maybe a couple) really cared about NASA and what it’s up to. Think again. And Hillary’s also not interested (her expertise and interest seems to lie in foreign affairs) and there will be no revival even if she gets in.

  • Kevin

    I really don’t think that one sentence or little paragraph was enough to say about space. Exploring space should have some great importance as finding America back in the day was an accidental but great importance. What happens if we happen to find something out there that would be life changing for the better? If we missed out on it then another country would get the benefits from it. Space is important because it’s vast and could hold answers to alternative solutions that we can’t find here on Earth.

    Both of the parties are saying the same thing, but they need to show how they are going to go about space. What do they plan on doing about space? Are they going to have goals they want to achieve or some kind of awareness fundraiser that gets people interested in space? I think they need to just mention it a little more because space doesn’t get enough credit it deserves.

  • Earl Fernades

    At the International Space Station ISS repairs are often needed on the exterior, the problem is it is a lot of work to send out a manned space walk to do this. Astronauts need oxygen and they have the problems of human error. Yet if we use robots, well they do not complain, unless programmed too. Robots in fact could spend months to fix something, astronauts five day space walk missions are about all we can muster right now and if we cannot get it done in time, imagine the cost for another launch. What about Fatigue factors, which take a toll on the organic components of the human body? Costs to send up a space crew to do repairs can be millions if not billions of dollars.*

    Take a look at the helpful content at our personal web portal
    <http://www.healthmedicinelab.com/viral-rash/

Leave a 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>