The announcement was the culmination of several years of efforts by local and state officials, including Perry, to lure SpaceX to establish the launch site there. The letter noted state officials first talked with SpaceX in the spring of 2011, and Perry had since met with SpaceX CEO Elon Musk and “provided letters of support” as SpaceX worked through launch site regulatory efforts with the FAA.

“Texas has been on the forefront of our nation’s space exploration efforts for decades, so it is fitting that SpaceX has chosen our state as they expand the frontiers of commercial space flight,” Perry said in the release.

The decision is a defeat for Florida, who had hoped to keep SpaceX’s commercial launches by developing a commercial launch site at a site named Shiloh just north of the Kennedy Space Center. An environmental assessment of the site is underway, although many local residents expressed opposition to the site at public hearings early this year.

A day after Perry’s announcement, Sen. Bill Nelson (D-FL) tried to put a positive spin on the situation. “I think you’re going to see a lot of commercial activity that is going to be there and on the Kennedy Space Center,” Nelson told Florida Today in an interview in the senator’s Orlando office. “So I think we have a robust future.”

Nelson also raised questions about the viability of the Texas site, noting that launches from there will have to pass through a narrow keyhole downrange, between Florida and Cuba, restricting the range of orbits those launches can meet. (Dogleg maneuvers can enable additional orbits, although at a cost in terms of performance.) “How many launches will be financially viable for them to do that from there?” he said. “I think that’s a story still to be told.”

KSC officials started last week a series of public hearings about the plans, which received a mixed reaction, Florida Today reported. Some of the negative reaction is about the environmental impact of those additional facilities, while others wondered if the plans conflicted with a separate master plan for Cape Canaveral developed by Space Florida, one that includes development of a new commercial launch pad at a site north of KSC called Shiloh. The FAA’s Office of Commercial Space Transportation has started an environmental impact study of the proposed Shiloh site, including public hearings later this year that attracted large crowds both in favor and opposed to the site.

KSC’s long-term plans have also attracted the attention of Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL). In a statement issued by his office Wednesday, Rubio said he met with KSC director Robert Cabana at his Washington office that day to discuss KSC’s master plan efforts. “It’s important that NASA and the commercial space industry coexist in a way that benefits our nation’s space and science goals, as well as Florida’s long-standing role as a hub of space-related job creation,” Rubio said in the statement.

The senator, though, also expressed concerns about how the plan might affect the state’s competitiveness in commercial space. “My hope is that NASA’s management plans for Kennedy do not put Florida at a competitive disadvantage, or deter or hamper commercial space entities from making full use of the facility and other potential launch sites in Florida,” Rubio said in the statement, adding that he received assurances from Cabana that would not be the case.

However, those efforts might be too late for perhaps the biggest target of Florida’s pursuit of additional launch business. Last week the FAA formally announced the availability of the final environmental impact assessment for the proposed spaceport near Brownsville, Texas. The FAA will publish a record of decision on the environmental assessment no sooner than 30 days after the Federal Register notice; that is likely the last major milestone before the FAA makes a decision on the spaceport license application itself.

The Brownsville site is designed exclusively for SpaceX, and while the company has made no formal decision, it’s been clear in recent weeks that the site is the leading contender to take over the bulk of SpaceX’s planned commercial launches. The company will continue to launch from Florida, such as NASA commercial cargo and (if selected) crew missions, as well as other government work, but launches like the Falcon 9 ORBCOMM mission slated to take place from Cape Canaveral in the coming days would shift to Texas in a few years, regardless of how KSC’s or Space Florida’s master plans turn out.

The bill, similar to existing laws in states such as Colorado, Florida, New Mexico, and Texas, allows spaceflight companies to have their customers sign liability release forms prior to their flights, and affirms that such liability releases are valid. The state Senate stripped some of the details in the House bill, which originally specified the language and format of the liability waiver. The final bill also does not include exceptions for gross negligence and intentional harm contained in the House bill.

The legislation was sought primarily by WorldView Enterprises, an Arizona company that plans to perform high-altitude balloon flights. Last year, the company received a determination by the FAA that such flights, to altitudes of about 30 kilometers, could be licensed as launches by the FAA’s Office of Commercial Space Transportation. The company is proposing to perform those flights from the town of Page in northern Arizona.

In the resolution, which also commends the Colorado Space Business Roundtable for forming a chapter of Citizens for Space Exploration, legislators call on the federal government to accelerate human spaceflight development efforts, including “regaining the ability of the United States to deliver persons and cargo to space by 2015.” The resolution doesn’t specify how to do that, but does go on to call on NASA to commit to “sending persons to destinations such as the moon, Lagrange points, asteroids, and Mars within this decade or as soon as technologically possible.” NASA’s current plans call for the first crewed flight of its Orion spacecraft, launched on a Space Launch System rocket, in 2021 on a mission in cislunar space, which would presumably not meet the “this decade” goal of the resolution.

According to the East Valley Tribune, the legislation improves the state’s “chances of landing a spaceport.” However, the primary beneficiary is World View Enterprises, the Tucson-based company that announced plans last year to carry people on high altitude balloons, and do so under an FAA launch license. The company has proposed performing those flights from near the northern Arizona city of Page, although the company is also considering potential locations in Nevada.

In Colorado, officials with several business organizations pressed the state’s legislature to approve a set of bills to support various industries in the state in a rally outside the state capitol on Thursday. Among the bills they support is HR1178, which would provide a sales and use tax exemption for “qualified property used in space flight.” The bill, introduced in the Colorado House late January, has yet to be considered by the full House, although its finance committee did favorably report it out last month and referred it to the appropriations committee.

However, while the race for the GOP nomination has attracted a dozen candidates, only about half have devoted much attention to space policy, based on the issues sections of their campaign websites, and those who have don’t go into much detail. A review of those who do discuss it:

John Amdur says he is “committed to exploration” on his website, including getting more people into science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields. “The crown jewel of the U.S. Space Program, JSC has been left to atrophy by indecision and utter lack of leadership in Washington,” he writes. “President Obama needs to stop sidestepping the issue and find a meaningful vision that will support the Space Center that has supported every single American to go into space; when I am in Washington, I will be the loud voice needed for CD-36’s place at the center of Space Exploration and the STEM fields.”

Doug Centilli doesn’t mention space on his issues page, but his website does include an endorsement from Doug Morrell, who was NASA chief of staff when Mike Griffin was administrator. “People who believe in the importance of America’s space program, and the role that the Johnson Space Center plays in human flight, need Doug Centilli in Congress,” Morell states. “Doug has the experience and track record to effectively fight for a strong, visionary and well funded space program.”

John Manlove says we must ensure that “we have continued excellence for our space capabilities” on the issues section of his site. “As your next Congressman, I will work vigorously to support NASA, protect it from any reduction of funding, and to strengthen our leadership in space exploration to ensure our national security and foreign policy objectives are met.” Manlove also won the endorsement of the Houston Chronicle in January in part because he “seeks a new, long-term vision for NASA.”

Kim Morrell only tangentially mentions space when, as a bullet point on the topic of “Military Readiness,” states: “Regain our military superiority in the air, outer space and on the ground.”

Dave Norman is the one candidate with an entire issues page devoted to space, with a similar theme of regaining leadership in space. “Unfortunately, President Obama is content to watch our space program fade away, sacrificed on the altar of an ambitious social agenda,” he writes. “Dave will work to restore our space program and technological leadership in the world through both reinvigorated NASA manned space exploration and with a NASA partnership with commercial space enterprises.”

Robin Riley worked nearly 20 years as a JSC contractor, so, not surprisingly, he has views on “Protecting NASA.” “I strongly encourage the federal government and NASA to work with American citizens and American businesses to research and develop a new vehicle to continue human space flight and maintain American’s leadership in space exploration,” he writes, not explaining whether this “new vehicle” would be different from the Orion vehicle NASA is developing or commercial crew systems also under development.

The rest of the Republican candidates—Brian Babin, Jim Engstrand, Phil Fitzgerald, Pat Kasprzak, Chuck Meyer, and Ben Streusand—don’t discuss space on their campaign sites. (In 2012, Meyer, who also ran for and lost the GOP nomination for the district, proposed a special kind of savings bond called “Space Bonds” to fund human spaceflight.)

With a field this large, the race for the nomination will likely go to a runoff election in late May. The eventual winner of the nomination, though, is likely to win the general election in November. In 2012, Stockman won the district with 70 percent of the vote. While a dozen Republicans are seeking their party’s nomination, only one Democrat is running in the district: Michael Cole, who ran in 2012 as a Libertarian. He also does not discuss space policy among the issues on his site. (A reader does note, though, that Cole does have a blog post about NASA on his campaign website, although not as part of his issues page.)

Meanwhile, in California, nine Democratic members of the state’s Congressional delegation sent a latter Thursday to University of California president Janet Napolitano, asking her to reconsider a decision to end university funding of Lick Observatory near San Jose. Late last year, the UC system decided to phase out funding of the observatory—about $1.8 million a year—starting in 2016, with funding ending entirely in 2018, and focus instead on the much larger Keck Observatory and the planned Thirty Meter Telescope. “While we certainly understand the constraints of tight budgets, it would be short-sighted to pinch pennies by shutting down this exemplary facility,” the members, led by Rep. Zoe Lofgren, write, arguing that the 125-year-old observatory’s “time is not passed.”

In the state Senate, Sen. Lee Cotter (R-Las Cruces) introduced SB 172, a bill that would require funds collected by the tax for the spaceport (three quarters of the tax revenue) be used solely for debt service on the bonds sold for spaceport construction or to begin paying off those bonds early. Currently, any excess if funds after interest is paid—currently about $600,000 per year—is used to support spaceport operations. The bill has made it through one Senate committee and is pending approval of another.

In an op-ed in the Las Cruces Sun-News a week ago, Cotter argued that the use of tax funds to support spaceport operations constituted a “bait and switch” for taxpayers. “Every dollar spent on daily operations extends the increase in taxes for years to come, injuring our local taxpayers,” he wrote.

Rick Holdridge, chairman of the board of the New Mexico Spaceport Authority, countered in an op-ed Sunday in the same newspaper that using the funds for spaceport operations is crucial right now, as the spaceport transitions to operations. “Now is not the time to withdraw support, just when the spaceport is poised to start paying dividends,” he wrote, adding that the decision to use the tax revenue in this way has been approved by local officials several times in public meetings.

The other one quarter of the spaceport tax revenue that is earmarked to support educational programs is also under scrutiny in Santa Fe. HB 13 would count that revenue when making calculations of what state aid the districts receive; in essence, the bill would reduce the aid districts in the two counties receive by the amount of funding they get from the spaceport tax—a cut from what they’re getting now. That bill has already passed the New Mexico House and is in committee in the state Senate. That is causing concern in Las Cruces, the Sun-News reported Sunday, although the impact of the bill, even if it does pass and is signed into law by Gov. Susana Martinez, remains unclear.

While the bill benefits any firm that has “a primary business purpose in space flight activities,” the company that triggered the legislation is SpaceX, after it received a property tax bill from Los Angeles County, Reuters reports. The bill was introduced by Assemblyman Al Muratsuchi (D), whose Southern California is near, but does not include, SpaceX’s headquarters and primary manufacturing facility in Hawthorne. The California State Association of Counties opposed the bill since they will lose out on an estimated $1.1 million a year in tax revenue should this become law.

AB 777 isn’t the only space-based legislation California’s legislature took up this week. On Monday, the Senate unanimously passed SB 415, which clarifies that an “informed consent” waiver provision for commercial human spaceflight is not “contrary to the public policy of this state.” That bill was introduced by Sen. Steve Knight (R), a vocal proponent of the state’s commercial space industry who has expressed an interest in running for the US House seat held by the retiring Rep. Buck McKeon (R-CA).

While California looks to give tax breaks to space companies there, one New Mexico legislator is seeking to better spend tax money being collected for that state’s commercial spaceport. New Mexico Sen. Lee Cotter (R) introduced this week SB 172, a bill that would require local sales taxes earmarked for Spaceport America be spent solely on paying off bonds for building it. Cotter recently expressed concern that the New Mexico Spaceport Authority was using the sales tax revenue to pay for spaceport operations, which he considers to go against the intent of voters in two southern New Mexico counties who voted for the tax in 2007 and 2008.

Spaceport officials say the tax revenue is needed to cover operations at a key time for the spaceport, whose major facilities are essentially complete but whose anchor tenant, Virgin Galactic, has not started operations here. “This money is really critical,” Christine Anderson, executive director of the New Mexico Spaceport Authority, told the Las Cruces (N.M.) Sun-News. “It’s really protecting the investment of the taxpayers because if we don’t have that, we may have to close the spaceport.”