By Jeff Foust on 2004 August 29 at 3:29 pm ET The phrase “Space Jam” usually brings up memories of a rather silly movie where Michael Jordan, Larry Bird, and other basketball stars demonstrated their limited acting abilities, even when augmented by the presence of various cartoon characters. However, the AP reports, the name is also being used for a reception Tuesday night at Studio 450, a few blocks from the convention site. The guest of honor at the $50,000 reception, sponsored by the Coalition for Space Exploration and its member corporations, is House Majority Leader Rep. Tom DeLay (R-TX). The coalition organized a similar reception at the DNC in Boston, although apparently without the “Space Jam” appellation.
Correction 9/3: Although Mr. Banke’s comment below makes it clear that the Coalition did not formally sponsor the reception, he has asked me to formally correct that statement in the original post. This message serves as that correction. I can understand, though, why many people, myself included, were confused because the party was sponsored by many of the coalition’s key corporate members, and that coalition material was apparently distributed at the event.
By Jeff Foust on 2004 August 29 at 12:02 pm ET The Republican National Conventional starts tomorrow in New York, which means it’s the perfect time to… think about the 2006 elections? Apparently that’s the case for the AP, which has this article about Adam Brecht, a Wall Street PR executive who is thinking about runnning for the Senate in New York state in 2006 against incumbent Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton. Brecht has some interesting thoughts about NASA:
While pressing traditional Republican themes such as making permanent President Bush’s tax cuts, Brecht also wants a federal commitment to curing cancer and Aids by 2050 and funding the effort, in part, by getting rid of NASA and leaving space exploration to the private sector.
NASA supporters should note that Brecht right now has virtually no name recognition among Republicans in the Empire State. However, 2006 is a long way off…
By Jeff Foust on 2004 August 26 at 12:33 pm ET An article in Wednesday’s edition of the Alamogordo (NM) Daily News paints US Senator Jeff Bingaman (D-NM) as a supporter of space tourism. “I think you’ll find a lot of people lining up” to participate in suborbital space tourist flights, he was quoted as saying during a visit to Alamogordo earlier in the week. He apparently also showed some interest in lining up federal funding to pay for the development of a commercial spaceport in southern New Mexico, which will eventually host the X Prize Cup competitions:
Eventually a spaceport will be built with the landing pad in Sierra County, [state Economic Development Department executive director Peter] Mitchell told Bingaman, but to do that federal funds are critical. The runway cost alone is $86 million, with another $10 million needed for infrastructure and telemetry technology.
“Is this an avenue you can support?” [space commissioner Dwight] Harp asked Bingaman.
“As far as the money, we can explore it,” said Bingaman, immediately directing his staff to begin investigating possibilities.
By Jeff Foust on 2004 August 25 at 12:39 pm ET The Washington Post published an article Wednesday about the problems the US may face down the road with the ISS. Russia currently provides Soyuz spacecraft to the ISS through an agreement that will expire after the October 2005 Soyuz taxi mission. After that, the US will have to pay Russia for additional Soyuz flights. That, however, would be in contravention of the Iran Nonproliferation Act, which prevents NASA from purchasing anything from Russia for the ISS unless the administration certifies that Russia is not assisting Iran with the development of weapons of mass destruction. With no such certification in sight, the US may soon be in a sticky situation with the ISS. There doesn’t appear to be any easy way out in the foreseeable future:
[A senior administration] official, who declined to be identified by name because of Bush administration policy, did not rule out eventual certification of Russian compliance, but said the administration has no immediate plans to take that step. The official also saw no way to use the “imminent” danger exemption as long as a Soyuz craft lifeboat is at the station.
Also off the table is the possibility of buying Soyuz spacecraft through intermediaries or negotiating a new barter agreement. Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Steven Pifer told Congress last year that such tactics “would likely be viewed by many as an evasion of the law.”
There’s not that much in the article that is new, but it is a good summary of the overall situation.
By Jeff Foust on 2004 August 24 at 11:06 pm ET In this week’s issue of The Space Review, Taylor Dinerman discusses the potential for cooperation between the US and China on space issues. Such cooperation might seem a bit far-fetched, given the past history between the two nations, including the “Chinagate” episode of tech transfer back during the 1990s, there are potential arenas of cooperation between the two nations, notably remote sensing. Dinerman suggests that Japan might serve as an intermediary in any cooperative efforts, although relations between China and Japan also have a rocky history. Moreover, no one, particularly in the US government, seems to be in much of a hurry to get such an effort started.
By Jeff Foust on 2004 August 23 at 12:48 pm ET In his closing plenary at the Mars Society’s annual conference in Chicago on Sunday, Robert Zubrin said that he believes that a Kerry Administration would support human exploration of the Moon and Mars. Zubrin said that he has spoken with Kerry’s “space staff” (it was unclear whether he meant Senate or campaign staffers, although I was left with the impression of the former) and that they “are not averse to the idea” of sending humans to the Moon and Mars. “It will take on a different formulation” than the current Vision for Space Exploration, Zubrin said, “but it will be just as good as what we have now.” What space advocates have to be aware of, though, he cautioned, is that if Kerry wins, he will be surrounded by a new retinue of advisors who may have different space policy ideas; thus, advocates should continue to be vigilant and press the Kerry campaign to promote human exploration beyond Earth orbit.
By Jeff Foust on 2004 August 19 at 9:19 am ET The Washington Space Business Roundtable plans to kick off its 2004-2005 luncheon series on September 21 with a talk by David Radzanowski, the head of the Science and Space Programs branch of the Office of Management and Budget. Radzanowski’s talk is titled “Space Funding: Will Congress Support the New Space Exporation Vision?” It should prove interesting…
By Jeff Foust on 2004 August 18 at 9:56 pm ET Florida Today published an article Wednesday describing last month’s Moon-Mars Blitz on Capitol Hill. The article is mostly a straightforward account of the lobbying efforts of private citizens, and the uphill battle they face to get funding for the Vision for Space Exploration. However, the article does have a goofy headline, “Space junkies push Congress”: it makes the participants seem a little like oddballs. It doesn’t help that two of the participants profiled are a husband and wife whose wedding had a “space theme”. The danger here is that space advocates may get marginalized, perceived as a fringe group not representative of a wider section of the American public.
The best quote from the article, though, comes from young Jake Hicks of Alabama, who believes that at least the Congressmen from his state will come around to support the plan. “If they are from Alabama, they sure like them votes.”
By Jeff Foust on 2004 August 17 at 12:38 pm ET Congressman Nick Smith (R-MI), chairman of the research subcommittee of the House Science Committee, made some interesting comments on the benefits of manned versus unmanned spaceflight in a commentary for the fairly obscure Truth News web site. Rep. Smith talks about the costs of the shuttle, station, and even Apollo programs, and concludes, “These projects have provided relatively little scientific discovery compared to cost benefit of unmanned missions.” He then suggests that current—and presumably future—human spaceflight programs will continue to be scrutinized by Congress after the August recess:
This fall, as we complete our appropriation bills, we will weigh the costs and benefits of our current manned space programs. With our overall efforts to reduce spending, debating potential changes to NASA will be futile if we first do not closely scrutinize our space science efforts, particularly with regard to manned versus unmanned exploration.
By Jeff Foust on 2004 August 16 at 1:09 pm ET The online publication The Washington Dispatch has an opinion piece by Mark Whittington on John Kerry’s space policy views. Regular readers of this blog will find little new here: there is discussion of Kerry’s Senate voting record on the space station project, his lukewarm endorsement of NASA (but not the Bush exploration program), and, of course, Bunnysuitgate. And that’s the problem with this commentary and (to be fair to Mr. Whittington) many other essays and editorials on space policy published in recent months: they’re fairly shallow. They mention Kerry’s anti-ISS voting record in the Senate through 1996, but ignore the votes he cast in support of it in 1997 and 1998, or why Kerry changed his opinion of the project so quickly. Essays like this one mention the “veto threat” the Bush Administration made when the House Appropriations Committee cut NASA’s budget, but fail to point out that the threat is, on the face of it, quite empty, since it is unlikely that Bush would veto a bill that funds veterans and housing programs in an election year (even less likely if the VA-HUD appropriations bill gets wrapped up into an omnibus appropriations bill.) The veto threat is not without significance as part of a bid to convince the full House to restore funding for NASA, but most analyses don’t go even that deep. Other people complain that Bush has said nothing publicly about the Vision for Space Exploration since its unveiling in January, but don’t question if a Bush statement about the plan would be actually that positive for the effort.
Here’s hoping that the professional journalists and experts with access to policymakers and other insiders will be able to flesh out some of these and other space policy details in the next two and a half months. However, as both campaigns turn their rhetoric amplifiers up to 11 and focus on the big issues, I’m not holding out that much hope.
|
|
