Space Politics » Campaign ’04

Post-election roundup

Jeff Foust — Mon, 08 Nov 2004 12:39:07 +0000

A few recent articles of note about space policy and last week’s election:

A Huntsville Times article Sunday argues that the Vision for Space Exploration will move ahead with President Bush’s reelection, with one local person, NASA Advisory Committee member Mark McDaniel, saying “People throughout NASA have been waiting on this election to start work.” However, local Congressman Bud Cramer (D-AL) says that the fate of the vision will depend on “budget priorities and the war.”
In this week’s edition of The Space Review, Taylor Dinerman asks if the election is “a mandate for exploration”. He argues that “unless the American people are given the chance to get involved or, at least, to feel that this investment will pay direct dividends to their children and grandchildren, the Vision will not be sustained.”
Also in TSR, Sam Dinkin reviews the passage of a California measure to fund stem cell research and wonders if a similar approach could work for space exploration. “If you look at NASA’s share of the federal budget, which runs at about 1%, it is not inconceivable that Sacramento could fund space to the tune of $10 billion over ten years and launch the first Mars mission, Hollywood-style.”

Election aftermath

Jeff Foust — Thu, 04 Nov 2004 18:15:50 +0000

With the 2004 election now behind us (sooner than I had imagined—or feared), Florida Today examined what Bush’s reelection and the Republicans’ hold on Congress meant for space policy. According to those interviewed, the election gives NASA an opportunity to solidify the Vision for Space Exploration through CEV development, an initial lunar robotic mission, and related activities. The article cautions towards the end, though, that budget pressures could cause problems for the program—and presumably NASA in general— down the road. (Ignore the reference to a $7-trillion budget deficit, though.)

The success of the vision appears to depend on the answers to a few key questions:

Will Congress be more willing to support and fund the VSE now that Bush has been reelected?
Will the President be willing to speak out and use political capital to support the VSE if Congress isn’t willing to fully support it?
Will Sean O’Keefe be “promoted” to a higher, possibly Cabinet-level position next year, as has been frequently rumored? If so, when does he leave (before or after RTF), and who might take his place?

One voter who didn’t have to stand in line

Jeff Foust — Wed, 03 Nov 2004 00:20:27 +0000

The AP reported that, as planned, ISS astronaut Leroy Chiao voted electronically from orbit. Chiao didn’t reveal who he voted for, but that he thought about it “long and hard” over the weekend, taking into account more than space policy in his decision. Chiao actually transmitted his vote Sunday night, Halloween: “maybe that’s kind of appropriate,” he said.

Summarizing space policy issues

Jeff Foust — Tue, 02 Nov 2004 18:25:17 +0000

If you’re one of those rare people for whom space policy is a deciding issue in this election, and you haven’t made your mind up for whom to vote today (yes, I realize I’ve probably reduced the size of the audience to zero, but just play along), you could do worse that to read Rand Simberg’s summary of the space policy positions of the two candidates published Monday at TCS. A couple of quibbles: Bush didn’t speak recently at KSC (that was Kerry, back in July; Bush spoke at Space Coast Stadium), and the article doesn’t mention Kerry’s switch from opposing to supporting the ISS after 1996. But, as Rand writes, “Whether you think that this record represents good or bad space policy depends partially on your opinion of those programs&#8230″

Kerry mentions space in Orlando

Jeff Foust — Mon, 01 Nov 2004 23:24:53 +0000

A reader emailed today and noted that C-SPAN carried a replay over the weekend of a Kerry campaign appearance Friday in Orlando. In that speech Kerry did mention space policy, claiming that he would “push the boundaries of the solar system” and “wouldn’t leave the money behind either.” Kerry’s campaign web site has a copy of his Orlando speech, but it doesn’t mention space; an Orlando Sentinel article about the appearance also doesn’t make note of space. Did anyone else out there catch the speech, live or on C-SPAN, and can share some additional insights?

Senator Barb and Hubble

Jeff Foust — Mon, 01 Nov 2004 12:48:04 +0000

Watching football Sunday afternoon, I was startled to see a political commercial mention the Hubble Space Telescope. I wasn’t surprised, though, to see that the ad was for Barbara Mikulski, who is running for reelection to the Senate here in Maryland. Mikulski “fought to save the Hubble telescope”, the ad claimed, and also mentioned that she “brought in high-tech jobs at NIH and Goddard Space Center”. (You can watch the ad in QuickTime and Real formats.)

Mikulski’s election web site has more on the topic, including a petition visitors can sign to save the Hubble. (As if there aren’t enough pro-Hubble petitions online already.) Her web site also notes that she fought to secure funding for the New Horizons mission to Pluto (being run by APL in Maryland, of course) as well as $10 million in funding to improve launch facilities at NASA Wallops. That’s more than you’ll see most candidates say about space, although she still has to master a bit more of the space learning curve: her web site also mentions that she successfully worked for “Wallops Flight Facility to be designated as a site for NASA’s commercial launches.” NASA’s commercial launches? Oh well…

Election eve articles in TSR

Jeff Foust — Mon, 01 Nov 2004 12:34:48 +0000

This week’s edition of The Space Review has three articles that touch upon space policy and the Presidential election:

Sam Dinkin looks at Kerry’s space policy and find that it “really says more about his domestic, Iraq, and terrorism policies than indicates much about what will happen for space in a Kerry presidency.”
Greg Zsidisin asks the question on the minds of Democratic space activists: vote for your party’s candidate, or for the candidate who proposed a new space exploration policy? Find out why he’s sticking with Kerry.
Taylor Dinerman examines the missile defense policies of Bush and Kerry with a particular eye towards space-based missile defense. While Bush is the stronger of the two on this topic, “there seems to be no real possibility that the US will be able to deploy any kind of boost-phase interceptor, either ground-based or space-based, by the end of his second term.”

A confusing space policy editorial

Jeff Foust — Sun, 31 Oct 2004 12:43:34 +0000

The Washington Times, the smaller—and more conservative—of DC’s two major daily newspapers, published an editorial describing the differences between the Bush and Kerry space policies. The Times should be praised for taking the time, in the final Sunday newspaper before the general election, to discuss space policy. However, their editorial is a little confusing.

The latter half of the editorial is fine: it clearly states the differences between Bush and Kerry on the exploration vision. It’s the first part, where it talks about Kerry’s focus on the shuttle and ISS, that’s a little unclear. A quote:

The loss of Columbia did more than reduce the shuttle fleet; it dictated either the retirement or re-certification of the remaining shuttles by 2010. Neither alternative is wise. The shuttles have never fulfilled their promise and their primary destination, the International Space Station (ISS), has proved a costly experimental platform.

It’s not clear what the writer is advocating: he appears to be opposed to retiring (or recertifying) the shuttle in 2010, but he also appears to be unimpressed with the shuttle and ISS in general. Another quote:

“Two of NASA’s top priorities,” under Mr. Kerry, would be returning the shuttle to flight and completing the ISS, according to spokesman Jason Furman.

I think one could argue that shuttle RTF and ISS completion are two of NASA’s top priorities today, and will be priorities regardless of who wins the election. In fact, as noted in the comments of a previous post, NASA is currently studying increasing the number of shuttle flights to ensure the proper completion of ISS, a move which would further delay the shuttle’s retirement date and most likely delay the exploration initiative (as it would be deprived of that wedge of funding freed up from shuttle operations.) Perhaps, despite the Times’ headline, Bush’s space policy isn’t that bold after all.

Weldon and Feeney rebut Glenn

Jeff Foust — Sat, 30 Oct 2004 14:17:23 +0000

In a column in Friday’s issue of Florida Today, Congressmen Dave Weldon (R-FL) and Tom Feeney (R-FL), who represent the Space Coast, respond to John Glenn’s column of a day earlier on Kerry’s space policy. The response is pretty predictable, although I think they could do better than this line in response to Glenn’s statements on shuttle and station: “Exactly where Glenn gets his facts we do not know.” Somehow, I think Glenn has a closer connection to the Kerry campaign than either Weldon or Feeney.

Near the end of the editorial the two Congressmen refer to Weldon’s campaign web site, which features a press release blasting Kerry’s record on space, with a record of Kerry’s votes against the space station through 1996. (Not surprisingly, it omits those votes in favor of ISS Kerry cast in 1997 and 1998.)

Florida Today on Bush vs. Kerry

Jeff Foust — Fri, 29 Oct 2004 13:13:29 +0000

Florida Today has an article Friday about the space policy positions of Bush and Kerry. Not much new here, although Lori Garver does explain those claims that a Kerry administration would sharply reduce the number of shuttle flights:

Garver said Bush backers are stretching something she said in a Washington debate with Sietzen far out of context. Noone knows how many times the shuttle must fly to finish the station or do other jobs such as maybe repairing Hubble Space Telescope, she said.

“They’re trying to get Florida votes by scaring people,” Garver said.

Frank Sietzen’s response:

“The president’s policy has been out there since January 14th,” Sietzen said. “Senator Kerry waited until the virtual last minute to publish a conflicting and contradictory space policy statement. Looks like Halloween came early, and Kerry’s plan is the trick.”

A related point: Jim Oberg has an article for MSNBC stating NASA is indeed looking at ways to retire the shuttle early. Reducing the number of shuttle flights below 20, though, would make it impossible to fulfill international agreements unless an alternative assembly approach using ELVs can be developed.