By Jeff Foust on 2007 October 15 at 12:49 pm ET Of all the potential space-related issues that can come up during a presidential campaign, how often do we overlook important topics like this:
Presidential hopeful Rudy Giuliani on Sunday said preparedness will be key for all crises, even an attack from outer space.
During a town hall meeting in Exeter [New Hampshire], a young questioner asked the former New York mayor about his plan to protect Earth.
“If (there’s) something living on another planet and it’s bad and it comes over here, what would you do?” the boy asked.
Giuliani, grin on his face, said it was the first time he’s been asked about an intergalactic attack.
“Of all the things that can happen in this world, we’ll be prepared for that, yes we will. We’ll be prepared for anything that happens,” said Giuliani, who spent the day campaigning in key early voting state.
Hmmm… this opens up a rich new vein of questioning for all the presidential candidates, not just Giuliani. How do they feel about a Mars sample return mission (after all, there might still be something microbial living on Mars that could be “bad”)? How much funding should NASA devote to astrobiology research? What about searches for potentially hazardous objects (which are not living, of course, but would be bad if one came here)? Who would be the tougher alien invader to deal with, Klingons or Romulans?
Somehow I think that last question has as good a shot of being asked as any of them…
By Jeff Foust on 2007 October 11 at 6:14 am ET Efforts to develop an alternative funding plan for Galileo stalled yesterday stalled when European transport ministers failed to agree on a proposal to use over €2 billion in unused agricultural funds to over most of the funding shortfall created when the public-private partnership originally envisioned to pay for the satellite navigation system fell through this year. Reports by Reuters and the AP suggest several reasons why ministers decided to hold off on a decision until next month, ranging from a desire to get ESA to pay a larger share of the system’s cost to ensuring that the countries that contribute the most to the system get a corresponding share of the contracts to develop the system. Also, some countries would like to see money come from the EU’s research and development budget rather than agricultural programs.
The AP article ends on this note about the lengths supporters of Galileo are going to win support for the project:
In its push for public funding, the European Commission points to a recent survey which showed that 80 percent of EU citizens believe the bloc should use taxpayers’ money to complete the Galileo project even though 40 percent of those questioned said they had not heard of it.
By Jeff Foust on 2007 October 10 at 6:04 am ET Yesterday Congressman Tom Feeney (R-FL) and state legislator Thad Altman met with Florida governor Charlie Crist and lieutenant governor Jeff Kottcamp to talk about the future of the space industry in the state (or, as a Tampa Bay TV station put it, “Florida’s Space Frontier”), with an eye towards mitigating the effects of the shuttle-CEV transition on the state’s economy, and in particular the economy of the Space Coast region of the state. Part of the problem is the so-called “gap” between the retirement of the shuttle and the introduction of Orion, although another issue (glossed over in the reports) is that, as currently planned, Orion and Ares 1 will not require as large a workforce as the shuttle does today.
What does Gov. Crist think about all this? “I’m very excited about the future as it relates to space, as it relates to the real estate market, and other things,” WTSP-TV reported. (Real estate market?) He also tells the Tallahassee Democrat that the situation is “on the precipice of panic” in Brevard County, home to KSC.
Feeney, talking up the strengths of the Cape Canaveral area, goes a little too far at one point with the Democrat: “We’re the best place on the planet because of the way the earth rotates – not even Congress can mess that up – to launch equatorial orbits,” he says. That’s doubtless a surprise to Arianespace, which launches out of Kourou, French Guiana, just a few degrees north of the Equator; or to Sea Launch, whose mobile launch site allows them to perform launches on the Equator. Proof, apparently, that while Congress can’t mess up the location of Cape Canaveral, a member of Congress can mess up its importance.
Feeney also asked Crist “to use his influence with visiting presidential candidates to make sure the Space Coast stays in the technology forefront,” according to the Democrat. One candidate already gets a conditional endorsement of sorts from Florida Today, which appreciates and largely supports Hillary Clinton’s space policy statement issued last week. The paper likes in particular the passing reference in the policy to accelerate Ares 1 and Orion development, but adds, “There’s no way to know if Clinton would actually follow this course, or if it’s just another talking point that will disappear like so much cosmic dust. The paper hopes that “Clinton’s stance will cause more candidates to come forward with their ideas” about space.
By Jeff Foust on 2007 October 10 at 5:42 am ET Most readers here are probably aware of the Mars Society’s political outreach work, including Operation President 2008, its effort to contact presidential candidates, determine their opinions about human exploration of Mars, and, if necessary, encourage them to support such efforts. Wired News has a feature article about the Mars Society’s efforts, following Chris Carberry, political director of the organization, on a trip to a Barack Obama rally in New Hampshire. A key issue: credibility. “Getting past the giggle factor is the first step — we have to show that we’re sane, serious people,” Carberry tells Wired.
So what does Obama think about Mars exploration? Carberry manages to get a few seconds with the candidate after the rally, as chronicled by Wired:
Over the Stevie Wonder song blasting from the sound system, Carberry blurted out his question. “I’m with a group called the Mars Society, and we’d like to know: Do you support the policy of journeying back to the moon and going on to Mars?”
Without a blink, Obama was ready. “I’m inspired by the idea of going to Mars,” he replied, projecting friendly sincerity. “I’m also mindful of the budgetary constraints. So I won’t give you an answer right now.”
Carberry followed up — could he give him some reading material, and make an appointment to speak with someone from his policy team? “Absolutely.” The folder was passed off to one of Obama’s staff, and the candidate moved on.
By Jeff Foust on 2007 October 10 at 5:29 am ET Rep. Jo Ann Davis (R-VA) passed away on Saturday after a long battle with cancer. Davis was a staunch supporter of aeronautics research in NASA, fighting proposals by the Bush Administration to cut funding for aeronautics research at the agency. As noted in an article over a year ago, she was much more interested in talking about aeronautics than even her own fight against breast cancer: “I’m not against space,” she said in an August 2006 speech. “I just don’t want to see us go to Mars at the expense of everything else.” Her funeral is Thursday, and is the reason why the House hearing on NEO research has been postponed to next month.
By Jeff Foust on 2007 October 9 at 1:10 pm ET Thursday’s scheduled hearing by the House Science and Technology Committee’s space subcommittee titled “Near-Earth Objects (NEOs) – Status of the Survey Program and Review of NASA’s Report to Congress” has been postponed, according to an updated hearing scheduled circulated by the committee earlier today. No reason for the postponement, nor a rescheduled hearing date, has been announced as of yet.
By Jeff Foust on 2007 October 9 at 1:07 pm ET On rare occasions, a comment posted here may not appear because it is mistakenly flagged as spam by filtering software (which, otherwise, does a fine job keeping junk comments from appearing.) Very long comments, or those with lots of links, are more likely to register as false positives. If you do post a comment and it does not appear, please email me and I’ll look into it: it’s usually straightforward to rescue the comment from the spam heap. Thanks.
By Jeff Foust on 2007 October 5 at 1:04 pm ET While the Senate was approving an amendment to the Commerce/Justice/Science appropriations bill to add $1 billion to NASA’s FY08 budget, the administration was again threatening to veto the bill. In a Statement of Administration Policy document released by OMB on Thursday, the administration accused Congress of including ” an irresponsible and excessive level of spending and… other objectionable provisions” to the funding bill. “[I]f S. 1745 were presented to the President” in its current form, the statement warned, “he would veto the bill.”
The statement says very little about NASA, and makes no reference to Sen. Mikulski’s amendment:
The Administration supports the Senate’s full funding for NASA’s Exploration Systems, Space Shuttle, International Space Station, and Aeronautics, but does not endorse funding in excess of the request for Science. In addition, the micromanaging of funding allocations specified in the Committee report would inhibit program managers’ ability to make effective and efficient decisions in support of ongoing mission activities.
Also, in the Commerce section of the statement, the statement notes the “the Administration is concerned that reductions for core geo-stationary satellite program and bureau-wide management services, as well as limitations on the length of availability of certain funds, would seriously impair the agency’s ability to carry out its missions.”
By Jeff Foust on 2007 October 5 at 6:51 am ET Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton’s proposed space policy, introduced during a speech Thursday in Washington, has provided a lot of fodder for both people in the space industry and armchair analysts alike. Seeing any discussion of space by a candidate is newsworthy; having a candidate devote several paragraphs to the subject, months before the first primaries and caucuses and more than a year before the general election, is quite rare. So how does this policy look?
Earth science is clearly a big winner here, as Clinton devoted a full paragraph of her speech to her concerns that such programs had languished during the Bush Administration. She promises to “fully fund” Earth science programs, although she doesn’t say with respect to what (perhaps the National Academies’ decadal survey report published earlier this year). She also proposes a “Space-based Climate Change Initiative” to study global warming and “to prepare for extreme climate events”.
Aeronautics also wins in Clinton’s policy, which decries the sharp decline in funding NASA’s aeronautics program has suffered in recent years. While not making any specific financial commitments, the policy states that Clinton would “make the financial investments in research and development necessary to shore up and expand our competitive edge”.
Prize programs in the sciences in general would also appear to benefit under a new Clinton Administration. In her speech she promoted “competitive prizes to encourage innovation”, although there are no specific details about prize programs in the policy statement. It would seem, though, that she would look favorably on programs like Centennial Challenges.
Human spaceflight and exploration has mixed prospects, it seems. The policy statement calls for a “robust” human spaceflight program “to complete the Space Station and later human missions”. as well as robotic missions “leading to future human exploration”. She also calls for accelerating the “development, testing, and deployment of next-generation launch and crew exploration vehicles”, an apparent, but not explicit, reference to Ares and Orion. (Whether those programs can be substantially accelerated without massive additional funding, though, is a n open question.)
However, there is no specific mention of the Moon or Mars in the policy. According to a New York Times article today, that was not an accidental oversight:
But in a telephone interview afterward, she said that in the short term she would subordinate Bush administration proposals for human exploration of the Moon and Mars to restoring cuts in aeronautics research and space-based studies of climate change and other earth science issues.
Travel to the Moon or Mars “excites people,” she said, “but I am more focused on nearer-term goals I think are achievable.”
That suggests that the long-term Vision for Space Exploration as laid out by the Bush Administration in 2004 would effectively be truncated with Ares and Orion (or whatever alternatives a Clinton Administration would pursue).
By Jeff Foust on 2007 October 4 at 8:23 pm ET The Senate earlier today approved an amendment to an appropriations bill that would add $1 billion to NASA’s FY2008 budget. The amendment, popularly known as the “Mikulski Miracle” after its sponsor, Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D-MD), was passed by the Senate on a voice vote. (According to Space News (sub. required), the Senate elected to approve the amendment without a roll call because the amendment had attracted a number of co-sponsors from both sides of the aisle, ranging from Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX), who has worked with Mikulski on the amendment since a similar effort last year, to Hillary Clinton (D-NY).) The Senate has yet to approve the appropriations bill itself, and may not get to it until after a weeklong recess that begins after tomorrow.
Approval of the measure is a big step forward in helping remove some of the fiscal pressures on NASA, but it’s hardly the last step. The Senate’s version of the bill has to be reconciled with the House version, which does not have the extra $1 billion; the final version may later face a presidential veto.
|
|
